You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name> on 2011/03/06 21:14:36 UTC
Re: svn commit: r1076726 -
/subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
pburba@apache.org wrote on Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 19:09:01 -0000:
> Author: pburba
> Date: Thu Mar 3 19:09:01 2011
> New Revision: 1076726
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1076726&view=rev
> Log:
> * subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
> (check_merge_results): Don't assume expected_reverse_merges is present, it
> may be None.
>
> Modified:
> subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py?rev=1076726&r1=1076725&r2=1076726&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py Thu Mar 3 19:09:01 2011
> @@ -1149,7 +1149,8 @@ def check_merge_results(log_chain, expec
> # Check to see if the number and values of the revisions is correct
> for log in log_chain:
> if (log['revision'] not in expected_merges
> - and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges):
> + and (expected_reverse_merges is not None
> + and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges)):
I'm re-reading this and I'm still not convinced that it's correct:
it means that if expected_reverse_merges is None, then the "Found
unexpected revision" error will never be raised. Is that the intended
semantics?
Or did you mean this ---
if (log['revision'] not in expected_merges
and (expected_reverse_merges is not None
? log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges
: True):
> raise SVNUnexpectedLogs("Found unexpected revision %d" %
> log['revision'], log_chain)
>
>
>
Re: svn commit: r1076726 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
Posted by Paul Burba <pt...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> pburba@apache.org wrote on Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 19:09:01 -0000:
>> Author: pburba
>> Date: Thu Mar 3 19:09:01 2011
>> New Revision: 1076726
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1076726&view=rev
>> Log:
>> * subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>> (check_merge_results): Don't assume expected_reverse_merges is present, it
>> may be None.
>>
>> Modified:
>> subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>>
>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py?rev=1076726&r1=1076725&r2=1076726&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py (original)
>> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py Thu Mar 3 19:09:01 2011
>> @@ -1149,7 +1149,8 @@ def check_merge_results(log_chain, expec
>> # Check to see if the number and values of the revisions is correct
>> for log in log_chain:
>> if (log['revision'] not in expected_merges
>> - and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges):
>> + and (expected_reverse_merges is not None
>> + and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges)):
>
> I'm re-reading this and I'm still not convinced that it's correct:
> it means that if expected_reverse_merges is None, then the "Found
> unexpected revision" error will never be raised. Is that the intended
> semantics?
Hi Daniel,
You are quite right, that error will never be raised and we can get a
false pass if the expected revisions are not complete. Also, this
function needs to handle the possibility of EXPECTED_MERGES being set
to none. Fixed both of these in
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1079400
Thanks,
Paul
> Or did you mean this ---
>
> if (log['revision'] not in expected_merges
> and (expected_reverse_merges is not None
> ? log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges
> : True):
>
>> raise SVNUnexpectedLogs("Found unexpected revision %d" %
>> log['revision'], log_chain)
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: svn commit: r1076726 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
Posted by Paul Burba <pt...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> pburba@apache.org wrote on Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 19:09:01 -0000:
>> Author: pburba
>> Date: Thu Mar 3 19:09:01 2011
>> New Revision: 1076726
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1076726&view=rev
>> Log:
>> * subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>> (check_merge_results): Don't assume expected_reverse_merges is present, it
>> may be None.
>>
>> Modified:
>> subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>>
>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py?rev=1076726&r1=1076725&r2=1076726&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py (original)
>> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py Thu Mar 3 19:09:01 2011
>> @@ -1149,7 +1149,8 @@ def check_merge_results(log_chain, expec
>> # Check to see if the number and values of the revisions is correct
>> for log in log_chain:
>> if (log['revision'] not in expected_merges
>> - and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges):
>> + and (expected_reverse_merges is not None
>> + and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges)):
>
> I'm re-reading this and I'm still not convinced that it's correct:
> it means that if expected_reverse_merges is None, then the "Found
> unexpected revision" error will never be raised. Is that the intended
> semantics?
Hi Daniel,
You are quite right, that error will never be raised and we can get a
false pass if the expected revisions are not complete. Also, this
function needs to handle the possibility of EXPECTED_MERGES being set
to none. Fixed both of these in
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1079400
Thanks,
Paul
> Or did you mean this ---
>
> if (log['revision'] not in expected_merges
> and (expected_reverse_merges is not None
> ? log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges
> : True):
>
>> raise SVNUnexpectedLogs("Found unexpected revision %d" %
>> log['revision'], log_chain)
>>
>>
>>
>