martinvonz added a comment.
> I need to specify the arguments instead of just specifying "*". Don't forget this one. INLINE COMMENTS > pulkit wrote in narrowcommands.py:293-295 > We can have a 'exp-ellipses-2' which will tell whether the server supports > ellipses widening using narrow_widen() wireprotocol command or not. I think > that should help in the meantime. Also will a week, or 10-15 days be enough > for you? I think it will be better if can prevent releasing this > compatibility because exp-ellipses-1 was introduced in this cycle only. We don't really care whether a version is released or not. It would be nice to have a version of the client that would use the new wire protocol with ellipses if the server said it supported that but would otherwise fall back to the old getbundle-based call. > pulkit wrote in narrowwirepeer.py:49 > I implemented the peer initially in core only, but while implementing server > side, I realized it rely on logic in narrowbundle2.py which also needs to be > moved to core. Then I decided to implement it cleanly in the extension and > then move it to core. It seems to depend only on `widen_bundle`, which doesn't seem to depend on anything else, so it would probably be easy to move it to core, but I won't insist. > pulkit wrote in narrowwirepeer.py:79-82 > I am not sure, I just copied from getbundle() handling: > https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/hg/file/1a4c1a3cc3f5/mercurial/wireprotov1server.py#l404 That code was added in https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/hg/rev/3e7f675628ad. Maybe @indygreg can tell us if he thinks we should support the same values for a new wireprotocol command. REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4813 To: pulkit, durin42, #hg-reviewers, martinvonz Cc: indygreg, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
