pburba_at_apache.org wrote on Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 15:46:10 -0000:
> Author: pburba
> Date: Tue Mar 8 15:46:09 2011
> New Revision: 1079400
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1079400&view=rev
> Log:
> Follow-up to rr1076726, fix a flawed log -g test helper.
>
> * subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py
> (check_merge_results): Account for the fact that the EXPECTED_MERGES arg
> might be None. Fix the check of expected merges so it doesn't spuriously
> pass when EXPECTED_REVSERSE_MERGES is none.
>
EXPECTED_REVERSE_MERGES
> Suggested by: danielsh
>
> 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=1079400&r1=1079399&r2=1079400&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/log_tests.py Tue Mar 8 15:46:09 2011
> @@ -1148,9 +1148,9 @@ 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 (expected_reverse_merges is not None
> - and log['revision'] not in expected_reverse_merges)):
> + if not ((expected_merges and log['revision'] in expected_merges)
> + or (expected_reverse_merges
> + and log['revision'] in expected_reverse_merges)):
If EXPECTED_MERGES and EXPECTED_REVERSE_MERGES are both None,
then the if() would trigger --- and I don't think that's the
intention.
> raise SVNUnexpectedLogs("Found unexpected revision %d" %
> log['revision'], log_chain)
>
>
Received on 2011-03-15 05:25:18 CET