ikostia accepted this revision.
ikostia added a comment.
LGTM
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D865
To: swhitaker, #hg-reviewers, ikostia
Cc: pulkit, ikostia, mercurial-devel
___
Mercurial-devel mailing
swhitaker updated this revision to Diff 2255.
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
CHANGES SINCE LAST UPDATE
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D865?vs=2229=2255
REVISION DETAIL
https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D865
AFFECTED FILES
mercurial/obsolete.py
tests/test-obsolete-bounds-checking.t
CHANGE
ikostia added a comment.
That is why we raise `ProgrammingError`, not some sort of `UserError`. If
your extension writes metadata longer than 255 chars, it is a bad extension.
Your proposal is weird, because it is quietly modifying things, IMO this is
much worse. I'd rather be forced to
swhitaker added a comment.
@ikostia Sure, I can change this.
What should we do if the metadata value is not under user control? In the
case of a username longer than 255 bytes, the user can change that in their
hgrc (although it's debatable whether they should; "error, your name is too
pulkit added a comment.
Also we append the issue number in the commit message at the end like
`(issue)` so that the Bugzilla bot can automatically close that. For
reference:
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/hg-committed/log?rev=issue=20
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
REVISION DETAIL
ikostia requested changes to this revision.
ikostia added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
I would rather see this thing do `raise error.ProrgrammingError('metadata
cannot be longer than 255 bytes')` (or some other message).
REPOSITORY
rHG Mercurial
REVISION
swhitaker created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: mercurial-devel.
Herald added a reviewer: hg-reviewers.
REVISION SUMMARY
Various mutators fail when attempting to write obsmarkers with
metadata fields longer than 255 bytes, since the length of
mwetadata fields is stored in u8s.
