ryanmce requested changes to this revision. ryanmce added a comment.
I think we need to take a step back and think through how to implement this more robustly than we have currently done in the remotenames extension: - storage file names - storage format I like that you've split branches and bookmarks, but I suspect that storing all paths in the same file isn't the best option. INLINE COMMENTS > remotenames.py:35 > + > + `node remotepath/bookmarkname` > + As per the issue you raised about paths containing '/', this probably is insufficient. > dlax wrote in remotenames.py:64 > Functions `saveremotebranches` and `saveremotebookmarks` are very similar, > only differing by the vfs file name. Perhaps there could be a single function > taking the filename as a parameter? +1 > remotenames.py:67-69 > + """ save remotenames i.e. remotebookmarks and remotebranches in their > + respective files under ".hg/remotenames/" directory. > + """ nit: start multiline docblocks on next line REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D939 To: pulkit, #hg-reviewers, dlax, ryanmce Cc: ryanmce, dlax, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
