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

Re: upgrade_tests 29 XFAIL

From: Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:55:53 +0000

"Bert Huijben" <bert_at_qqmail.nl> writes:

>> W: Couldn't find node 'E' in expected entries tree
>> W: * Node name: E
>> Path: svn-test-work/working_copies/upgrade_tests-29/A/B/E
>> Contents: None
>> Properties: {}
>> Attributes: {'status': 'R ', 'wc_rev': '1'}
>> Children: None (node is probably a file)
>> Is the upgrade right or wrong to create the op-depth=3
>> presence=incomplete row?
> I think the idea is that it adds this first and then when walking the
> 'entries' in the directory itself the information is improved.
> Maybe we should have another set of operations to run when we don't find the
> entries in the directory.

I think with the above you are referring to the upgrade code? So you
think that update should be changing the op-depth=3, presence=incomplete
row into something else?

> Another option would be to make the test verify that you can recover from
> this situation by running 'svn revert' on E. If that works it would be good
> enough for me.
> (The entries have a slightly different idea about what a replacement is
> compared to status. Every node with a BASE node is replaced, even though the
> node is not the op-root that replaces the node. There are entry_status,
> entry_rev and entry_copied keywords to handle this in the test suite)

As far as I can see tweak_for_entries_compare is removing the '!' node
that the test puts into expected_status. I don't know how to make the
test pass.

Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
Received on 2013-01-22 18:56:33 CET

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.