Thu, 19 Dec 2019 22:31:13 -0800 cleanup: replace .parents()[0] by .p1()
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com> [Thu, 19 Dec 2019 22:31:13 -0800] rev 5019
cleanup: replace .parents()[0] by .p1()
Wed, 27 Nov 2019 20:54:48 +0530 evolve: add more tests for --continue case when relocating "divergent"
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Wed, 27 Nov 2019 20:54:48 +0530] rev 5018
evolve: add more tests for --continue case when relocating "divergent"
Wed, 27 Nov 2019 19:50:33 +0530 evolve: use meaningful variable names for a return value
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Wed, 27 Nov 2019 19:50:33 +0530] rev 5017
evolve: use meaningful variable names for a return value
Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:34:19 +0530 evolve: add logic to cover --continue case when relocating "divergent"
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:34:19 +0530] rev 5016
evolve: add logic to cover --continue case when relocating "divergent" Changes in test file demonstrate the added behaviour.
Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:28:52 +0530 evolve: add test for `--continue` case when relocating "divergent"
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Mon, 25 Nov 2019 21:28:52 +0530] rev 5015
evolve: add test for `--continue` case when relocating "divergent" This test shows that for now we don't handle the continue case when relocating "divergent" cset hit merge conflict while resolving content-divergence. Next patch will be adding the support for --continue case.
Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:12:51 +0530 evolve: use more specific key name to store in evolvestate
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:12:51 +0530] rev 5014
evolve: use more specific key name to store in evolvestate Now, as we also relocate divergent cset if required, so let's use more specific key to track the relocation of "divergent" and "other".
Fri, 13 Dec 2019 01:29:27 +0530 evolve: move a test where it makes more sense
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Fri, 13 Dec 2019 01:29:27 +0530] rev 5013
evolve: move a test where it makes more sense
Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:22:18 +0530 evolve: remove the unnecessary condition to check empty successors set
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:22:18 +0530] rev 5012
evolve: remove the unnecessary condition to check empty successors set I annotated the history of this "newer == [()]" condition and found that it was added in the initial stages of evolution project (more than 8 years ago) and there is no test where we get [()] as a successor set. So looks like "if not newer" is enough to check if it is empty. I also looked into obsutil.successorssets() implementation and I don't think it would give us [()] in any case.
(0) -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -8 +8 +10 +30 +100 +300 tip