[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: svn commit: r1131109 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 19:12:38 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bert Huijben [mailto:bert_at_qqmail.nl]
> Sent: vrijdag 3 juni 2011 19:11
> To: sbutler_at_apache.org
> Cc: dev_at_subversion.apache.org; commits_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: RE: svn commit: r1131109 -
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/stat_tests.py

> It is quite possible that they are both right.
> svn_wc_entry_t can't express everything that we can in the NODES layers.
> Especially with multi layered replacements the status (which is based on the
> top one or two layers) can be different than svn_wc_entry_t (which looks at
> the lowest and the highest layer and notes tree replacements as
> replacement on every node instead of only at the root: the way the old
> revert base worked).
> There are a few more tests where the results differ. For that specific case
> you can add entry_status and entry_rev arguments to the test suite.

But I shouldn't forget: It is certainly not impossible that they are both wrong...

I think we need an op_depth test for this case to verify all layers of the result.

> Bert
Received on 2011-06-03 19:13:15 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.