From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: sbeller@google.com, gitster@pobox.com, Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 09/34] directory rename detection: testcases checking which side did the rename
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 17:42:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171129014237.32570-10-newren@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171129014237.32570-1-newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
---
t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 321 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 321 insertions(+)
diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh
index 29b2af7f19..5db2986de8 100755
--- a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh
+++ b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh
@@ -1138,4 +1138,325 @@ test_expect_failure '5d-check: Directory/file/file conflict due to directory ren
# back to old handling. But, sadly, see testcases 8a and 8b.
###########################################################################
+
+###########################################################################
+# SECTION 6: Same side of the merge was the one that did the rename
+#
+# It may sound obvious that you only want to apply implicit directory
+# renames to directories if the _other_ side of history did the renaming.
+# If you did make an implementation that didn't explicitly enforce this
+# rule, the majority of cases that would fall under this section would
+# also be solved by following the rules from the above sections. But
+# there are still a few that stick out, so this section covers them just
+# to make sure we also get them right.
+###########################################################################
+
+# Testcase 6a, Tricky rename/delete
+# Commit O: z/{b,c,d}
+# Commit A: z/b
+# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
+# Expected: y/b, CONFLICT(rename/delete, z/c -> y/c vs. NULL)
+# Note: We're just checking here that the rename of z/b and z/c to put
+# them under y/ doesn't accidentally catch z/d and make it look like
+# it is also involved in a rename/delete conflict.
+
+test_expect_success '6a-setup: Tricky rename/delete' '
+ test_create_repo 6a &&
+ (
+ cd 6a &&
+
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo b >z/b &&
+ echo c >z/c &&
+ echo d >z/d &&
+ git add z &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "O" &&
+
+ git branch O &&
+ git branch A &&
+ git branch B &&
+
+ git checkout A &&
+ git rm z/c &&
+ git rm z/d &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "A" &&
+
+ git checkout B &&
+ mkdir y &&
+ git mv z/b y/ &&
+ git mv z/c y/ &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "B"
+ )
+'
+
+test_expect_success '6a-check: Tricky rename/delete' '
+ (
+ cd 6a &&
+
+ git checkout A^0 &&
+
+ test_must_fail git merge -s recursive B^0 >out &&
+ test_i18ngrep "CONFLICT (rename/delete).*z/c.*y/c" out &&
+
+ test 2 -eq $(git ls-files -s | wc -l) &&
+ test 1 -eq $(git ls-files -u | wc -l) &&
+ test 1 -eq $(git ls-files -o | wc -l) &&
+
+ git rev-parse >actual \
+ :0:y/b :3:y/c &&
+ git rev-parse >expect \
+ O:z/b O:z/c &&
+ test_cmp expect actual
+ )
+'
+
+# Testcase 6b, Same rename done on both sides
+# (Related to testcases 6c and 8e)
+# Commit O: z/{b,c}
+# Commit A: y/{b,c}
+# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
+# Expected: y/{b,c}, z/d
+# Note: If we did directory rename detection here, we'd move z/d into y/,
+# but B did that rename and still decided to put the file into z/,
+# so we probably shouldn't apply directory rename detection for it.
+
+test_expect_success '6b-setup: Same rename done on both sides' '
+ test_create_repo 6b &&
+ (
+ cd 6b &&
+
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo b >z/b &&
+ echo c >z/c &&
+ git add z &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "O" &&
+
+ git branch O &&
+ git branch A &&
+ git branch B &&
+
+ git checkout A &&
+ git mv z y &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "A" &&
+
+ git checkout B &&
+ git mv z y &&
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo d >z/d &&
+ git add z/d &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "B"
+ )
+'
+
+test_expect_success '6b-check: Same rename done on both sides' '
+ (
+ cd 6b &&
+
+ git checkout A^0 &&
+
+ git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
+
+ test 3 -eq $(git ls-files -s | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -u | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -o | wc -l) &&
+
+ git rev-parse >actual \
+ HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:z/d &&
+ git rev-parse >expect \
+ O:z/b O:z/c B:z/d &&
+ test_cmp expect actual
+ )
+'
+
+# Testcase 6c, Rename only done on same side
+# (Related to testcases 6b and 8e)
+# Commit O: z/{b,c}
+# Commit A: z/{b,c} (no change)
+# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
+# Expected: y/{b,c}, z/d
+# NOTE: Seems obvious, but just checking that the implementation doesn't
+# "accidentally detect a rename" and give us y/{b,c,d}.
+
+test_expect_success '6c-setup: Rename only done on same side' '
+ test_create_repo 6c &&
+ (
+ cd 6c &&
+
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo b >z/b &&
+ echo c >z/c &&
+ git add z &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "O" &&
+
+ git branch O &&
+ git branch A &&
+ git branch B &&
+
+ git checkout A &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit --allow-empty -m "A" &&
+
+ git checkout B &&
+ git mv z y &&
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo d >z/d &&
+ git add z/d &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "B"
+ )
+'
+
+test_expect_success '6c-check: Rename only done on same side' '
+ (
+ cd 6c &&
+
+ git checkout A^0 &&
+
+ git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
+
+ test 3 -eq $(git ls-files -s | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -u | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -o | wc -l) &&
+
+ git rev-parse >actual \
+ HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:z/d &&
+ git rev-parse >expect \
+ O:z/b O:z/c B:z/d &&
+ test_cmp expect actual
+ )
+'
+
+# Testcase 6d, We don't always want transitive renaming
+# (Related to testcase 1c)
+# Commit O: z/{b,c}, x/d
+# Commit A: z/{b,c}, x/d (no change)
+# Commit B: y/{b,c}, z/d
+# Expected: y/{b,c}, z/d
+# NOTE: Again, this seems obvious but just checking that the implementation
+# doesn't "accidentally detect a rename" and give us y/{b,c,d}.
+
+test_expect_success '6d-setup: We do not always want transitive renaming' '
+ test_create_repo 6d &&
+ (
+ cd 6d &&
+
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo b >z/b &&
+ echo c >z/c &&
+ mkdir x &&
+ echo d >x/d &&
+ git add z x &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "O" &&
+
+ git branch O &&
+ git branch A &&
+ git branch B &&
+
+ git checkout A &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit --allow-empty -m "A" &&
+
+ git checkout B &&
+ git mv z y &&
+ git mv x z &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "B"
+ )
+'
+
+test_expect_success '6d-check: We do not always want transitive renaming' '
+ (
+ cd 6d &&
+
+ git checkout A^0 &&
+
+ git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
+
+ test 3 -eq $(git ls-files -s | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -u | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -o | wc -l) &&
+
+ git rev-parse >actual \
+ HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:z/d &&
+ git rev-parse >expect \
+ O:z/b O:z/c O:x/d &&
+ test_cmp expect actual
+ )
+'
+
+# Testcase 6e, Add/add from one-side
+# Commit O: z/{b,c}
+# Commit A: z/{b,c} (no change)
+# Commit B: y/{b,c,d_1}, z/d_2
+# Expected: y/{b,c,d_1}, z/d_2
+# NOTE: Again, this seems obvious but just checking that the implementation
+# doesn't "accidentally detect a rename" and give us y/{b,c} +
+# add/add conflict on y/d_1 vs y/d_2.
+
+test_expect_success '6e-setup: Add/add from one side' '
+ test_create_repo 6e &&
+ (
+ cd 6e &&
+
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo b >z/b &&
+ echo c >z/c &&
+ git add z &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "O" &&
+
+ git branch O &&
+ git branch A &&
+ git branch B &&
+
+ git checkout A &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit --allow-empty -m "A" &&
+
+ git checkout B &&
+ git mv z y &&
+ echo d1 > y/d &&
+ mkdir z &&
+ echo d2 > z/d &&
+ git add y/d z/d &&
+ test_tick &&
+ git commit -m "B"
+ )
+'
+
+test_expect_success '6e-check: Add/add from one side' '
+ (
+ cd 6e &&
+
+ git checkout A^0 &&
+
+ git merge -s recursive B^0 &&
+
+ test 4 -eq $(git ls-files -s | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -u | wc -l) &&
+ test 0 -eq $(git ls-files -o | wc -l) &&
+
+ git rev-parse >actual \
+ HEAD:y/b HEAD:y/c HEAD:y/d HEAD:z/d &&
+ git rev-parse >expect \
+ O:z/b O:z/c B:y/d B:z/d &&
+ test_cmp expect actual
+ )
+'
+
+###########################################################################
+# Rules suggested by section 6:
+#
+# Only apply implicit directory renames to directories if the other
+# side of history is the one doing the renaming.
+###########################################################################
+
test_done
--
2.15.0.408.g850bc54b15
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-29 1:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-29 1:42 [PATCH v4 00/34] Add directory rename detection to git Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 01/34] Tighten and correct a few testcases for merging and cherry-picking Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 02/34] merge-recursive: fix logic ordering issue Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 03/34] merge-recursive: add explanation for src_entry and dst_entry Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 04/34] directory rename detection: basic testcases Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 05/34] directory rename detection: directory splitting testcases Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 06/34] directory rename detection: testcases to avoid taking detection too far Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 07/34] directory rename detection: partially renamed directory testcase/discussion Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 08/34] directory rename detection: files/directories in the way of some renames Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` Elijah Newren [this message]
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 10/34] directory rename detection: more involved edge/corner testcases Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 11/34] directory rename detection: testcases exploring possibly suboptimal merges Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 12/34] directory rename detection: miscellaneous testcases to complete coverage Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 13/34] directory rename detection: tests for handling overwriting untracked files Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 14/34] directory rename detection: tests for handling overwriting dirty files Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 15/34] merge-recursive: move the get_renames() function Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 16/34] merge-recursive: introduce new functions to handle rename logic Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 17/34] merge-recursive: fix leaks of allocated renames and diff_filepairs Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 18/34] merge-recursive: make !o->detect_rename codepath more obvious Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 19/34] merge-recursive: split out code for determining diff_filepairs Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 20/34] merge-recursive: add a new hashmap for storing directory renames Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 21/34] merge-recursive: make a helper function for cleanup for handle_renames Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 22/34] merge-recursive: add get_directory_renames() Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 23/34] merge-recursive: check for directory level conflicts Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 24/34] merge-recursive: add a new hashmap for storing file collisions Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 25/34] merge-recursive: add computation of collisions due to dir rename & merging Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 26/34] merge-recursive: check for file level conflicts then get new name Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 27/34] merge-recursive: when comparing files, don't include trees Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 28/34] merge-recursive: apply necessary modifications for directory renames Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 29/34] merge-recursive: avoid clobbering untracked files with " Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 30/34] merge-recursive: fix overwriting dirty files involved in renames Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 31/34] merge-recursive: fix remaining directory rename + dirty overwrite cases Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 32/34] directory rename detection: new testcases showcasing a pair of bugs Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 33/34] merge-recursive: avoid spurious rename/rename conflict from dir renames Elijah Newren
2017-11-29 1:42 ` [PATCH v4 34/34] merge-recursive: ensure we write updates for directory-renamed file Elijah Newren
2017-12-13 1:06 ` [PATCH v4 00/34] Add directory rename detection to git Junio C Hamano
2017-12-13 2:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-12-13 15:38 ` Elijah Newren
2017-12-13 18:15 ` Ramsay Jones
2017-12-13 19:05 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171129014237.32570-10-newren@gmail.com \
--to=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.