tests/test-push-checkheads-superceed-A1.t
author Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com>
Mon, 19 Mar 2018 16:43:47 -0700
changeset 37047 fddcb51b5084
parent 35393 4441705b7111
child 42893 34a46d48d24e
permissions -rw-r--r--
wireproto: define permissions-based routing of HTTPv2 wire protocol Now that we have a scaffolding for serving version 2 of the HTTP protocol, let's start implementing it. A good place to start is URL routing and basic request processing semantics. We can focus on content types, capabilities detect, etc later. Version 2 of the HTTP wire protocol encodes the needed permissions of the request in the URL path. The reasons for this are documented in the added documentation. In short, a) it makes it really easy and fail proof for server administrators to implement path-based authentication and b) it will enable clients to realize very early in a server exchange that authentication will be required to complete the operation. This latter point avoids all kinds of complexity and problems, like dealing with Expect: 100-continue and clients finding out later during `hg push` that they need to provide authentication. This will avoid the current badness where clients send a full bundle, get an HTTP 403, provide authentication, then retransmit the bundle. In order to implement command checking, we needed to implement a protocol handler for the new wire protocol. Our handler is just small enough to run the code we've implemented. Tests for the defined functionality have been added. I very much want to refactor the permissions checking code and define a better response format. But this can be done later. Nothing is covered by backwards compatibility at this point. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2836

====================================
Testing head checking code: Case A-1
====================================

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 A: simple case involving a branch being superceeded by another.
TestCase 1: single-changeset branch

.. old-state:
..
.. * 1 changeset branch
..
.. new-state:
..
.. * 1 changeset branch succeeding to A
..
.. expected-result:
..
.. * push allowed
..
.. graph-summary:
..
..   A ø⇠◔ A'
..     |/
..     ●

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

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

  $ mkdir A1
  $ cd A1
  $ 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 A1
  created new head
  $ hg debugobsolete `getid "desc(A0)" ` `getid "desc(A1)"`
  obsoleted 1 changesets
  $ hg log -G --hidden
  @  f6082bc4ffef (draft): A1
  |
  | x  8aaa48160adc (draft): A0
  |/
  o  1e4be0697311 (public): root
  

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

  $ hg push
  pushing to $TESTTMP/A1/server
  searching for changes
  adding changesets
  adding manifests
  adding file changes
  added 1 changesets with 1 changes to 1 files (+1 heads)
  1 new obsolescence markers
  obsoleted 1 changesets

  $ cd ../..