view tests/test-push-checkheads-pruned-B3.t @ 36858:01f6bba64424

hgweb: remove support for POST form data (BC) Previously, we called out to cgi.parse(), which for POST requests parsed multipart/form-data and application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-Type requests for form data, combined it with query string parameters, returned a union of the values. As far as I know, nothing in Mercurial actually uses this mechanism to submit data to the HTTP server. The wire protocol has its own mechanism for passing parameters. And the web interface only does GET requests. Removing support for parsing POST data doesn't break any tests. Another reason to not like this feature is that cgi.parse() may modify the QUERY_STRING environment variable as a side-effect. In addition, it merges both POST data and the query string into one data structure. This prevents consumers from knowing whether a variable came from the query string or POST data. That can matter for some operations. I suspect we use cgi.parse() because back when this code was initially implemented, it was the function that was readily available. In other words, I don't think there was conscious choice to support POST data: we just got it because cgi.parse() supported it. Since nothing uses the feature and it is untested, let's remove support for parsing POST form data. We can add it back in easily enough if we need it in the future. .. bc:: Hgweb no longer reads form data in POST requests from multipart/form-data and application/x-www-form-urlencoded requests. Arguments should be specified as URL path components or in the query string in the URL instead. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2774
author Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com>
date Sat, 10 Mar 2018 11:07:53 -0800
parents 1a09dad8b85a
children 89630d0b3e23
line wrap: on
line source

====================================
Testing head checking code: Case B-3
====================================

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 3: multi-changeset branch, other is pruned, rest is superceeded

.. old-state:
..
.. * 2 changeset branch
..
.. new-state:
..
.. * old head is superceeded
.. * old other is pruned
..
.. expected-result:
..
.. * push allowed
..
.. graph-summary:
..
..   B ø⇠◔ B'
..     | |
..   A ⊗ |
..     |/
..     ●

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

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

  $ mkdir B3
  $ cd B3
  $ setuprepos
  creating basic server and client repo
  updating to branch default
  2 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
  $ cd server
  $ mkcommit B0
  $ cd ../client
  $ hg pull
  pulling from $TESTTMP/B3/server
  searching for changes
  adding changesets
  adding manifests
  adding file changes
  added 1 changesets with 1 changes to 1 files
  new changesets d73caddc5533
  (run 'hg update' to get a working copy)
  $ hg up 0
  0 files updated, 0 files merged, 1 files removed, 0 files unresolved
  $ mkcommit B1
  created new head
  $ hg debugobsolete --record-parents `getid "desc(A0)"`
  obsoleted 1 changesets
  1 new orphan changesets
  $ hg debugobsolete `getid "desc(B0)" ` `getid "desc(B1)"`
  obsoleted 1 changesets
  $ hg log -G --hidden
  @  25c56d33e4c4 (draft): B1
  |
  | x  d73caddc5533 (draft): B0
  | |
  | x  8aaa48160adc (draft): A0
  |/
  o  1e4be0697311 (public): root
  

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

  $ hg push
  pushing to $TESTTMP/B3/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 2 changesets

  $ cd ../..