Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:58:51 +0100] rev 4997
test: add test for content divergence involving a date update
In this case, each side update the date.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:55:37 +0100] rev 4996
test: add test for content divergence involving a date update
In this case, one side update to an earlier date.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:27:55 +0100] rev 4995
test: add test for content divergence involving a date update
In this case, one side update to an older date.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Tue, 10 Dec 2019 19:13:06 +0100] rev 4994
test: highlight data handling when solving divergence
The current handling of date is lacking, we add test to highlight this.
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Sat, 07 Dec 2019 03:27:50 +0530] rev 4993
evolve: add tests for the case when resolution parent is ambiguous
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Fri, 06 Dec 2019 23:43:00 +0530] rev 4992
evolve: abort if deciding resolution parent is ambiguous
While solving content-divergence, it could be hard to decide
which cset should be treated as a resolution parent if there
are multiple successors of divergent cset. i.e split case.
But we are planning to make some update in handling this split
case:
1) consider highest one if all splitted csets are in a single
topological branch
2) still need to decide if 1) doesn't apply
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Sat, 23 Nov 2019 16:17:04 +0530] rev 4991
evolve: make sure divergence resolution doesn't undo changes (issue6203)
Before this patch, in content-divergence resolution logic if resolution
parent is not the parent of any of the two divergent changesets then
it could undo some changes introduced by previous revs (while resolving
stack of content-divergent changesets) as demonstrated by the test added in
previous patch.
To solve this, what this patch doing is: if divergent cset has obsolete
parent with a successor then first resolve the "orphan" instability of
divergent cset by relocating, then perform the content-divergence resolution.
After this change in logic, I found that it's kind of more correct as
reflected by the changes in tests/test-evolve-content-divergent-corner-cases.t
where it prevented creating conflicts while merging.
Changes in tests/test-evolve-content-divergent-stack.t demonstrate the fixed
behaviour.
Next patches will be covering the `evolve --continue` case for the relocation
of "divergent" cset.
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Sat, 23 Nov 2019 20:25:16 +0530] rev 4990
evolve: add test to demonstrate issue6203
Current logic of content-divergence resolution contains a bug that
if resolution parent is not the parent of any of the two divergent
changesets, it could undo some changes.
I think a good solution for this is to first relocate the divergent cset
to it's obsolete parent's successor if applicable and then perform
the content-divergence resolution.
Next patch will fix the issue.
Anton Shestakov <av6@dwimlabs.net> [Mon, 09 Dec 2019 16:01:56 +0700] rev 4989
state: there's no _unpack in struct
Caught by pytype.
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Sun, 29 Sep 2019 11:47:18 +0530] rev 4988
amend: abort if both --patch and --extract are used