Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:15:57 +0530 evolve: fix the inconsistent behaviour of prune (issue6137) stable
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:15:57 +0530] rev 4702
evolve: fix the inconsistent behaviour of prune (issue6137) Let's not update to any revision when working directory parent is not related to the revision being pruned. Changes in test file demonstrate the fixed behaviour.
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 21:00:46 +0530 prune: add tests to demonstrate issue6137 stable
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Tue, 02 Jul 2019 21:00:46 +0530] rev 4701
prune: add tests to demonstrate issue6137 Here we can see that prune updates off to the parent revision even when the pruned revision wasn't related with the working directory parent. A follow-up patch will fix this.
Sun, 30 Jun 2019 23:50:57 +0530 compat: fix `setupevolveunfinished` for upstream
Sushil khanchi <sushilkhanchi97@gmail.com> [Sun, 30 Jun 2019 23:50:57 +0530] rev 4700
compat: fix `setupevolveunfinished` for upstream
Sat, 29 Jun 2019 18:21:57 +0800 prune: update to the successor of wdir also with --pair/--biject (issue6142) stable
Anton Shestakov <av6@dwimlabs.net> [Sat, 29 Jun 2019 18:21:57 +0800] rev 4699
prune: update to the successor of wdir also with --pair/--biject (issue6142) When prune is used with --pair flag, we can also update to the successor of working directory parent. No need to check len(sucs) or len(precs) here because there's a check for that earlier in the code (it's a requirement of biject). The tests are now demonstrate the correct behavior: when rev 14 was pruned with 12 as its successor, the bookmark that was on 14 was moved to 12. That bookmark was also activated (even before this patch).
(0) -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -4 +4 +10 +30 +100 +300 tip