|
Size: 2808
Comment:
|
← Revision 8 as of 2013-07-24 09:51:48 ⇥
Size: 3412
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 27: | Line 27: |
| * I was expecting a more aggressive rewrite of '''all''' calls to `hg_rawread'''. I detail some more here: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/C-Hglib/hg_rawreadUsageParadigm | * I was expecting a more aggressive rewrite of '''all''' calls to `hg_rawread`. I detail some more here: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/C-Hglib/hg_rawreadUsageParadigm |
| Line 30: | Line 30: |
| * do not expect people to go and clone your bbucket repo. If you want code to be reviewed, the only way is to patchbomb it to m-dev * The less code you submit for review, the faster it will be reviewed. I would submit only the header and (possiblym but not sure) `main.c`. Not the implementation. To be discussed, anyway. * Please keep in mind that all implementation code you wrote was a '''personal experiment''', with the sole purpose of clarifying your mind on the problem domain. Please do not respond to questions in the list with "yes I see your point but in my implementation (elsewhere) I already fixed this and that". As far as m-dev is concerned, your bbucket repo does not exists. |
* '''Only patchbombed code matters:''' do not expect people to go and clone your bbucket repo. If you want code to be reviewed, the only way is to patchbomb it to m-dev * '''No code flood:''' The less code you submit for review, the faster it will be reviewed. I would submit only the header and (possiblym but not sure) `main.c`. Not the implementation. To be discussed, anyway. * '''Up to now, you experimented:''' Please keep in mind that all implementation code you wrote was a '''personal experiment''', with the sole purpose of clarifying your mind on the problem domain. Please do not respond to questions in the list with "yes I see your point but in my implementation (elsewhere) I already fixed this and that". As far as m-dev is concerned, your bbucket repo does not exists. * '''People do not like to repeat themselves:''' make 100% sure that you address '''all''' issues pinpointed in the past. Here a list of relevant mail thread and IRC backlogs: * http://mercurial.markmail.org/thread/qsfwzmxzzs4ekuuv * http://mercurial.markmail.org/thread/f5irmijzatlephtw * http://markmail.org/message/ism45s5vp7jsbp5u * http://markmail.org/message/mrh66tuh6phivxml * http://bpaste.net/show/FW3tCYalMJIjNkgRwyOG/ * and whatever else I forgot. |
Wed June 26th 2013, 14h00 UTC+2
partecipants: iulians, ggherdov, idank, marmoute (maybe)
meeting agenda (proposal)
Random items from ggherdov, in no particular order
where are we w/ the header files (i.e. issue 6) ?
- outline your main datastructures. What are the objects you need to represent in C (eg, the client).
is a connection kept forever opened for all the run of the program using c-hglib? smth like hg_init() and hg_close()
communitation btween C and hg serve --cmdline. It is via FIFO (unix pipe) and not socket, do we agree?
- question to idank: what other MODE where planned if any?
- supposed to work on windows?
list of python hglib functionalities (extended tutorial ?) I mean: list of commands implemented by python-hglib? I guess c-hglib gotta do the same.
testing strategy: pyhglib uses nose, https://nose.readthedocs.org/en/latest/ . What about test first (see issue 8)
- can I "attack" a "living" server as I would do with one that offer a socket as IPC? I mean can different programs talk to the same commandserver ?
looks like python-hglib open a subprocess for each command,
Wed July 24th 2013, 12h00 UTC+2
ggherdov agenda
Not totally satisfied by commit https://bitbucket.org/istana/c-hglib/commits/75e05ec67e21f7814fa4136c97f89ed1b88cd9fa (topic: make the hg_rawread usage as close as possible to Matt's snippet).
I was expecting a more aggressive rewrite of all calls to hg_rawread. I detail some more here: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/C-Hglib/hg_rawreadUsageParadigm
- Midterm evaluation is this week. We're in the need of getting Matt approval on the level 0 header.
- attitude
Only patchbombed code matters: do not expect people to go and clone your bbucket repo. If you want code to be reviewed, the only way is to patchbomb it to m-dev
No code flood: The less code you submit for review, the faster it will be reviewed. I would submit only the header and (possiblym but not sure) main.c. Not the implementation. To be discussed, anyway.
Up to now, you experimented: Please keep in mind that all implementation code you wrote was a personal experiment, with the sole purpose of clarifying your mind on the problem domain. Please do not respond to questions in the list with "yes I see your point but in my implementation (elsewhere) I already fixed this and that". As far as m-dev is concerned, your bbucket repo does not exists.
People do not like to repeat themselves: make 100% sure that you address all issues pinpointed in the past. Here a list of relevant mail thread and IRC backlogs:
- attitude