On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com> wrote:
> Hi Paul.
>
>> Author: pburba
>> Date: Thu Dec 1 18:38:38 2011
>> New Revision: 1209176
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1209176&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Fix issue #4056 "don't record non-inheritable mergeinfo if missing
>> subtrees are not touched by the full-depth diff".
>>
>> * subversion/libsvn_client/mergeinfo.h
>>
>> (svn_client__merge_path_t): Add a few new members.
>>
>> * subversion/libsvn_client/merge.c
>>
>> (calculate_merge_inheritance): Stop adjusting a rangelist in place and
>> instead simply communicate back to the caller they inheritance type
>> required to describe the merge.
>>
>> (insert_parent_and_sibs_of_sw_absent_del_subtree): Set one of the new
>> svn_client__merge_path_t members.
>>
>> (flag_subtrees_needing_mergeinfo): New. Takes an initial walk over
>
>
> Is there a description missing there?
Yes, I adjusted the log message.
> The other parts of the log message detail don't seem to mention a functional change so I guess it's in this function is it?
It is.
> - Julian
>
>
>> (record_mergeinfo_for_dir_merge): Factor out the bulk of the code which
>> determines if a subtree of interest *needs* new mergeinfo to describe a
>> merge -- see flag_subtrees_needing_mergeinfo for its new home. Leave
>> behind the code which actually *calculates* what the actual mergeinfo is
>> and records it.
>>
>> (do_directory_merge): Account for new differentiation between missing and
>> switched children.
>>
>> * subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_authz_tests.py
>>
>> (mergeinfo_and_skipped_paths): Expand test for greater coverage of
>> issue #4056 and adjust existing expectations to account for the more
>> concise mergeinfo produced by this fix.
>>
>> * subversion/tests/cmdline/merge_tests.py
>>
>> (merge_to_path_with_switched_children): Adjust existing expectations to
>> account for the more concise mergeinfo produced by this fix.
>>
>> (noninheritable_mergeinfo_test_set_up): Adjust test expectations a bit.
>> We still expect no spurious subtree mergeinfo, but how this is
>> accomplished (set it, then elide it) was not what the test
>> originally expected.
>>
>> (unnecessary_noninheritable_mergeinfo_missing_subtrees): Remove XFail
>> decorator and comment.
Received on 2011-12-07 17:55:24 CET