remote-bzr: fix cloning of non-listable repos

Commit 95b0c60 (remote-bzr: add support for bzr repos) introduced a
regression by assuming all bzr remote repos are listable, but they are
not.

If they are not listable they are basically useless, so let's assume
there is no bzr repo.

Reported-by: Thorsten Kranzkowski <dl8bcu@dl8bcu.de>
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
remote-bzr: recover from failed clones

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
remote-bzr: fix for files with spaces

Set the maximum number of splits to make when dividing the diff stat
lines based on space characters.

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
remote-bzr: simplify get_remote_branch()

No need for 'origin', it's only needed for the bzrdir 'sprout' method,
which can be greatly simplified.

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
remote-bzr: delay cloning/pulling

Until the branch is actually going to be used.

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
remote-bzr: change global repo

It's not used anyway.

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
remote-bzr: trivial cleanups

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
revision.c: treat A...B merge bases as if manually specified

The documentation assures users that "A...B" is defined as "A B --not
$(git merge-base --all A B)". This wasn't in fact quite true, because
the calculated merge bases were not sent to add_rev_cmdline().

The main effect of this was that although

  git rev-list --ancestry-path A B --not $(git merge-base --all A B)

worked, the simpler form

  git rev-list --ancestry-path A...B

failed with a "no bottom commits" error.

Other potential users of bottom commits could also be affected by this
problem, if they examine revs->cmdline_info; I came across the issue in
my proposed history traversal refinements series.

So ensure that the calculated merge bases are sent to add_rev_cmdline(),
flagged with new 'whence' enum value REV_CMD_MERGE_BASE.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
decorate.c: compact table when growing

When growing the table, take the opportunity to "compact" it by removing
entries with NULL decoration.

Users may have "removed" decorations by passing NULL to
insert_decoration. An object's table entry can't actually be removed
during normal operation, as it would break the linear hash collision
search. But we can remove NULL decoration entries when rebuilding the
table.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t6019: test file dropped in -s ours merge

In preparation for upcoming TREESAME work, check the result for G.t,
which is dropped in "-s ours" merge L. The default rev-list is empty, as
expected - it follows the first parent path where it never existed.

Unfortunately, --ancestry-path is also empty. Merges H J and L are all
TREESAME to 1 parent, so are treated as TREESAME and not shown. This is
clearly undesirable in the case of merge L, which dropped our G.t by
taking the non-ancestry-path version. Document this as a known failure,
and expect "H J L", the 3 merges along the path that had to chose G.t
versions.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t6111: new TREESAME test set

Some side branching and odd merging to illustrate various flaws in
revision list scans, particularly when limiting the list.

Many expected failures, which will be gone by the end of the "history
traversal refinements" series.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t6111: allow checking the parents as well

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t6111: add parents to tests

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
rev-list-options.txt: correct TREESAME for P

In the example given, P is not TREESAME to E. This doesn't affect the
current result, but it will matter when we change behaviour.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Documentation: avoid "uninteresting"

The documentation of --boundary uses the term "uninteresting", which is
not used or defined anywhere else in the documentation. This is
unhelpful and confusing to anyone who hasn't seen the UNINTERESTING
flag in the source code.

Change to use "excluded", as per revisions.txt.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
revision.c: Make --full-history consider more merges

History simplification previously always treated merges as TREESAME
if they were TREESAME to any parent.

While this was consistent with the default behaviour, this could be
extremely unhelpful when searching detailed history, and could not be
overridden. For example, if a merge had ignored a change, as if by "-s
ours", then:

  git log -m -p --full-history -Schange file

would successfully locate "change"'s addition but would not locate the
merge that resolved against it.

Futher, simplify_merges could drop the actual parent that a commit
was TREESAME to, leaving it as a normal commit marked TREESAME that
isn't actually TREESAME to its remaining parent.

Now redefine a commit's TREESAME flag to be true only if a commit is
TREESAME to _all_ of its parents. This doesn't affect either the default
simplify_history behaviour (because partially TREESAME merges are turned
into normal commits), or full-history with parent rewriting (because all
merges are output). But it does affect other modes. The clearest
difference is that --full-history will show more merges - sufficient to
ensure that -m -p --full-history log searches can really explain every
change to the file, including those changes' ultimate fate in merges.

Also modify simplify_merges to recalculate TREESAME after removing
a parent. This is achieved by storing per-parent TREESAME flags on the
initial scan, so the combined flag can be easily recomputed.

This fixes some t6111 failures, but creates a couple of new ones -
we are now showing some merges that don't need to be shown.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
t6012: update test for tweaked full-history traversal

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
simplify-merges: never remove all TREESAME parents

When simplifying an odd merge, such as one that used "-s ours", we may
find ourselves TREESAME to apparently redundant parents. Prevent
simplify_merges() from removing every TREESAME parent; if this would
happen reinstate the first TREESAME parent - the one that the default
log would have followed.

This avoids producing a totally disjoint history from the default log
when the default log is a better explanation of the end result, and aids
visualisation of odd merges.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
simplify-merges: drop merge from irrelevant side branch

Reimplement commit 4b7f53da on top of the new simplify-merges
infrastructure, tightening the condition to only consider root parents;
the original version incorrectly dropped parents that were TREESAME to
anything.

Original log message follows.

The merge simplification rule stated in 6546b59 (revision traversal:
show full history with merge simplification, 2008-07-31) still
treated merge commits too specially.  Namely, in a history with this
shape:

	---o---o---M
	          /
         x---x---x

where three 'x' were on a history completely unrelated to the main
history 'o' and do not touch any of the paths we are following, we
still said that after simplifying all of the parents of M, 'x'
(which is the leftmost 'x' that rightmost 'x simplifies down to) and
'o' (which would be the last commit on the main history that touches
the paths we are following) are independent from each other, and
both need to be kept.

That is incorrect; when the side branch 'x' never touches the paths,
it should be removed to allow M to simplify down to the last commit
on the main history that touches the paths.

Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
revision.c: add BOTTOM flag for commits

When performing edge-based operations on the revision graph, it can be
useful to be able to identify the INTERESTING graph's connection(s) to
the bottom commit(s) specified by the user.

Conceptually when the user specifies "A..B" (== B ^A), they are asking
for the history from A to B. The first connection from A onto the
INTERESTING graph is part of that history, and should be considered. If
we consider only INTERESTING nodes and their connections, then we're
really only considering the history from A's immediate descendants to B.

This patch does not change behaviour, but adds a new BOTTOM flag to
indicate the bottom commits specified by the user, ready to be used by
following patches.

We immediately use the BOTTOM flag to return collect_bottom_commits() to
its original approach of examining the pending commit list rather than
the command line. This will ensure alignment of the definition of
"bottom" with future patches.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>