tests/test-push-checkheads-pruned-B6.t
author Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com>
Mon, 08 Oct 2018 17:10:59 -0700
changeset 40132 e67522413ca8
parent 35400 4441705b7111
child 42899 34a46d48d24e
permissions -rw-r--r--
wireprotov2: define and use stream encoders Now that we have basic support for defining stream encoding, it is time to start doing something with it. We define various classes implementing stream encoders/decoders for the defined encoding profiles. This is relatively straightforward. We teach the inputstream and outputstream classes how to encode, decode, and flush data. We then teach the clientreactor how to filter received data through the inputstream decoder. One of the features of the framing format is that streams can span requests. This is a differentiating feature from say HTTP/2, which associates streams with requests. By allowing streams to span requests, we can reuse compression context data across requests/responses. But in order to do this, we need a mechanism to "flush" the encoder at logical boundaries so that receivers receive all data where it is expected. And a "flush" event is distinct from a "finish" event from the perspective of certain compressors because a "flush" will retain compression context state whereas a "finish" operation will not. This is why encoders have both a flush() and a finish() and each uses specific flushing semantics on the underlying compressor. The added tests verify various behavior of decoders via clientreactor. These tests do test some compression behavior via use of outputstream. But for all intents and purposes, server reactor support for encoding is not yet implemented. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4921

====================================
Testing head checking code: Case B-6
====================================

Mercurial checks for the introduction of new heads on push. Evolution comes
into play to detect if existing branches on the server are being replaced by
some of the new one we push.

This case is part of a series of tests checking this behavior.

Category B: simple case involving pruned changesets
TestCase 6: single changesets, pruned then superseeded (on a new changeset)

.. old-state:
..
.. * 1 changeset branch
..
.. new-state:
..
.. * old branch is rewritten onto another one,
.. * the new version is then pruned.
..
.. expected-result:
..
.. * push allowed
..
.. graph-summary:
..
..   A ø⇠⊗ A'
..     | |
..     | ◔ B
..     |/
..     ●

  $ . $TESTDIR/testlib/push-checkheads-util.sh

Test setup
----------

  $ mkdir B6
  $ cd B6
  $ setuprepos
  creating basic server and client repo
  updating to branch default
  2 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
  $ cd client
  $ hg up 0
  0 files updated, 0 files merged, 1 files removed, 0 files unresolved
  $ mkcommit B0
  created new head
  $ mkcommit A1
  $ hg up 'desc(B0)'
  0 files updated, 0 files merged, 1 files removed, 0 files unresolved
  $ hg debugobsolete `getid "desc(A0)"` `getid "desc(A1)"`
  obsoleted 1 changesets
  $ hg debugobsolete --record-parents `getid "desc(A1)"`
  obsoleted 1 changesets
  $ hg log -G --hidden
  x  ba93660aff8d (draft): A1
  |
  @  74ff5441d343 (draft): B0
  |
  | x  8aaa48160adc (draft): A0
  |/
  o  1e4be0697311 (public): root
  

Actual testing
--------------

  $ hg push
  pushing to $TESTTMP/B6/server
  searching for changes
  adding changesets
  adding manifests
  adding file changes
  added 1 changesets with 1 changes to 1 files (+1 heads)
  2 new obsolescence markers
  obsoleted 1 changesets

  $ cd ../..