martinvonz added inline comments.

INLINE COMMENTS

> indygreg wrote in histedit.py:446
> Err wait. Why is `repo.unfiltered()` being used here? If the previous code 
> worked on on the filtered repo, shouldn't this code?
> 
> The side effect of this change is that a histedit rule could reference a 
> hidden changeset. That feels wrong.

> If the previous code worked on on the filtered repo, shouldn't this code?

The previous code just *looked like* it worked on the filtered repo :) This is 
copied from changectx.__init__(), which is where this would end up getting 
resolved before.

I don't remember what the reason is for *that* code to use the unfiltered repo 
(I think it had something to do with making {shortest(node)} length match 
what's actually unambiguous. Either way, this patch should not be changing any 
behavior, I think.

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3158

To: martinvonz, durin42, #hg-reviewers, indygreg
Cc: indygreg, mercurial-devel
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

Reply via email to