Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On 09.03.2011 06:44, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > IMO, it's "hg diff --git" that's broken, as it doesn't include the base > revision (other formats, such as "hg export", do). I asked about it on #mercurial. It turns out that not including the base changeset id in the diff is an oversight, not a ch

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Le 09/03/2011 03:41, Guido van Rossum a écrit : > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Éric Araujo wrote: >> I’m of the opinion that hg diffs should always use the extended git >> format, given their usefulness. A tool working with hg diffs that does >> not support this format is broken IMO. > > Can

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

> The idea is to pull their remote branch but not merge it, which will create > multiple heads locally. “hg pull some-repo-uri” does that. > Then find the common ancestor of my regular local head and the new head, > and diff the ancestor with the new head. I think Mercurial revsets can do that, bu

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Éric Araujo wrote: > What’s the command you use with git? Maybe someone will find the Mercurial one. > Something like the following, assuming we're both working on branch "master" to begin with. git fetch their-repository master:experimental-branch git diff mas

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

> IMO, it's "hg diff --git" that's broken, as it doesn't include the base > revision (other formats, such as "hg export", do). I agree that it's poor form to omit the revisions, and we should supplicate Mercury at his temple. But I don't see the problem for Reitveld integration; they're ea

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

"Martin v. Loewis" writes: > > I’m of the opinion that hg diffs should always use the extended git > > format, given their usefulness. A tool working with hg diffs that does > > not support this format is broken IMO. > > IMO, it's "hg diff --git" that's broken, as it doesn't include the base

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On 09.03.2011 06:44, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >> I’m of the opinion that hg diffs should always use the extended git >> format, given their usefulness. A tool working with hg diffs that does >> not support this format is broken IMO. > > IMO, it's "hg diff --git" that's broken, as it doesn't inclu

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

"Martin v. Löwis" writes: > > Doesn't "hg diff -r 'ancestor(branch,default)::branch'", where "branch" > > is the unmerged branch you would like to inspect, do the right thing? > > What would I specify as "branch" if all I have is > "http://bitbucket.com/turnbull/foo";, and know that it must

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

I’m of the opinion that hg diffs should always use the extended git format, given their usefulness. A tool working with hg diffs that does not support this format is broken IMO. IMO, it's "hg diff --git" that's broken, as it doesn't include the base revision (other formats, such as "hg export"

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Éric Araujo wrote: > I’m of the opinion that hg diffs should always use the extended git > format, given their usefulness.  A tool working with hg diffs that does > not support this format is broken IMO. Can you please contribute changes to Rietveld to support that

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Hi, First, thank you for stepping up again to work on the code review integration. > It seems that the dev guide recommends to use the --git option in hg > diff. From “hg help diffs”: While this standard format [unified diff] is often enough, it does not encode the following information

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Hi, Le 08/03/2011 19:04, Daniel Stutzbach a écrit : >>> With a branch you can easily view the full patch, making a branch >>> strictly more general. >> I just asked this before: how *exactly* do you do that? > I confess: I'm not sure exactly how to do it in hg. I know it's easy in > git; I assume

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Am 08.03.2011 11:19, schrieb Antoine Pitrou: On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 09:38:27 +0100 "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: However, as Michael points out, you can have your tools generate the patch. For example, it shouldn't be too hard to add a dynamic patch generator to Roundup (although I haven't thought abo

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Am 08.03.2011 11:30, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull: "Martin v. Löwis" writes: > > However, as Michael points out, you can have your tools generate the > > patch. For example, it shouldn't be too hard to add a dynamic patch > > generator to Roundup (although I haven't thought about the

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:34 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > With a branch you can easily view the full patch, making a branch >> strictly more general. >> > > I just asked this before: how *exactly* do you do that? > I confess: I'm not sure exactly how to do it in hg. I know it's easy in git; I

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mar 08, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >Barry Warsaw writes: > > > I hear this complaint [about branches being no help in reviewing] a > > lot from hg and git users, so maybe it's just the nature of the > > tools. In which case, I'm fine with whatever works better for > > Python

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

"Martin v. Löwis" writes: > > However, as Michael points out, you can have your tools generate the > > patch. For example, it shouldn't be too hard to add a dynamic patch > > generator to Roundup (although I haven't thought about the UI or the > > CPU burden). > For Mercurial, that's more d

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 09:38:27 +0100 "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > > However, as Michael points out, you can have your tools generate the > > patch. For example, it shouldn't be too hard to add a dynamic patch > > generator to Roundup (although I haven't thought about the UI or the > > CPU burden). >

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On 2011-03-08 10:53, Adrian Buehlmann wrote: > On 2011-03-08 09:38, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >>> However, as Michael points out, you can have your tools generate the >>> patch. For example, it shouldn't be too hard to add a dynamic patch >>> generator to Roundup (although I haven't thought about t

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On 2011-03-08 09:38, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >> However, as Michael points out, you can have your tools generate the >> patch. For example, it shouldn't be too hard to add a dynamic patch >> generator to Roundup (although I haven't thought about the UI or the >> CPU burden). > > For Mercurial, t

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

However, as Michael points out, you can have your tools generate the patch. For example, it shouldn't be too hard to add a dynamic patch generator to Roundup (although I haven't thought about the UI or the CPU burden). For Mercurial, that's more difficult than you might expect. There is "hg in

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

With a branch you can easily view the full patch, making a branch strictly more general. I just asked this before: how *exactly* do you do that? Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Barry Warsaw writes: > I hear this complaint [about branches being no help in reviewing] a > lot from hg and git users, so maybe it's just the nature of the > tools. In which case, I'm fine with whatever works better for > Python. First, let me remind you that PEP 374 was quite clear about o

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 17:28, Daniel Stutzbach wrote: > With a branch you can easily view the full patch, making a branch strictly > more general. > > The advantage of having a branch comes when you want to review the second > or third iteration of a proposed change. With a branch, you can view

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Antoine Pitrou wrote: > How do you review a branch? Below is an example from github (because that's where my experience with reviewing DCVS branches comes from), but I think it communicates the idea well. The user hsoft forked my blist project, made some changes, and sent me a request to pu

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mar 07, 2011, at 07:44 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: >I agree with Thomas' answer here: while a branch makes it easier to >maintain a patch (but you can also use e.g. Mercurial Queues), it >doesn't make it easier to *review*. You are assuming that I, as a >reviewer, want to know about the history

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On 07/03/2011 18:35, Michael Foord wrote: On 07/03/2011 18:32, Thomas Wouters wrote: On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:04, Barry Warsaw > wrote: On Mar 07, 2011, at 06:31 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: >On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:04:18 -0500 >Barry Warsaw mailto:ba...@pyt

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 13:04:11 -0500 Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Mar 07, 2011, at 06:31 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > >On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:04:18 -0500 > >Barry Warsaw wrote: > >> On Mar 07, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: > >> > >> >If we can get to a mode where non-committers can push to a

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On 07/03/2011 18:32, Thomas Wouters wrote: On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:04, Barry Warsaw > wrote: On Mar 07, 2011, at 06:31 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: >On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:04:18 -0500 >Barry Warsaw mailto:ba...@python.org>> wrote: >> On Mar 07, 2011, at

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:04, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Mar 07, 2011, at 06:31 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > >On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:04:18 -0500 > >Barry Warsaw wrote: > >> On Mar 07, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: > >> > >> >If we can get to a mode where non-committers can push to a "fork"

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mar 07, 2011, at 06:31 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: >On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:04:18 -0500 >Barry Warsaw wrote: >> On Mar 07, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: >> >> >If we can get to a mode where non-committers can push to a "fork" on >> >hg.python.org, we can dodge the patch format issue by ha

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:04:18 -0500 Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Mar 07, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: > > >If we can get to a mode where non-committers can push to a "fork" on > >hg.python.org, we can dodge the patch format issue by having folks post > >"pull requests" for that fork instaed. >

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

On Mar 07, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Tres Seaver wrote: >If we can get to a mode where non-committers can push to a "fork" on >hg.python.org, we can dodge the patch format issue by having folks post >"pull requests" for that fork instaed. > >For the repoze and pylons projects, we have found the quality a

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/06/2011 11:32 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > Am 07.03.2011 03:43, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull: >> "Martin v. Löwis" writes: >> > Am 07.03.2011 02:24, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull: >> > > "Martin v. Löwis" writes: >> > >> It seems t

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Am 07.03.2011 03:43, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull: "Martin v. Löwis" writes: > Am 07.03.2011 02:24, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull: > > "Martin v. Löwis" writes: > >> It seems that the dev guide recommends to use the --git option in hg > >> diff. I'm working on the Rietveld

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

"Martin v. Löwis" writes: > Am 07.03.2011 02:24, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull: > > "Martin v. Löwis" writes: > > > It seems that the dev guide recommends to use the --git option in hg > > > diff. I'm working on the Rietveld integration, and found that this > > > option makes things wor

Re: [Python-Dev] hg diff

Am 07.03.2011 02:24, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull: "Martin v. Löwis" writes: > It seems that the dev guide recommends to use the --git option in hg > diff. I'm working on the Rietveld integration, and found that this > option makes things worse: the regular diff includes the base revision

[Python-Dev] hg diff

"Martin v. Löwis" writes: > It seems that the dev guide recommends to use the --git option in hg > diff. I'm working on the Rietveld integration, and found that this > option makes things worse: the regular diff includes the base revision > of the patch; hg diff --git doesn't. Does the regular

[Python-Dev] hg diff

It seems that the dev guide recommends to use the --git option in hg diff. I'm working on the Rietveld integration, and found that this option makes things worse: the regular diff includes the base revision of the patch; hg diff --git doesn't. So I would rather like people not to use the --git opt