Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:35:23AM -0600, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > >> A little late, but never never, here's the promised tarballs for Subversion >> 1.6.7. The magic revision is r893529, and you can find the tarballs here: >> >> http://orac.ece.utexas.edu/pub/svn/1.6.7/ >> >> Please be sure to test the bindings. >> > > A python bindings test fails: > > $ python ./mergeinfo.py > F..... > ====================================================================== > FAIL: test_mergeinfo_get (__main__.SubversionMergeinfoTestCase) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "./mergeinfo.py", line 115, in test_mergeinfo_get > self.compare_mergeinfo_catalogs(mergeinfo, expected_mergeinfo) > File "./mergeinfo.py", line 140, in compare_mergeinfo_catalogs > self.compare_mergeinfos(catalog1[k], catalog2[k]) > File "./mergeinfo.py", line 145, in compare_mergeinfos > self.assertEqual(keys1, keys2) > AssertionError: ['/branches/a', '/branches/b', '/branches/c', '/trunk'] != > ['branches/a', 'branches/b', 'branches/c', 'trunk'] > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Ran 6 tests in 2.544s > > FAILED (failures=1) > > The patch below fixes the test in 1.6.x. > > The tests on trunk seem to be even more broken and fail for other > reasons. > > [[[ > Fix failing test in SWIG python bindings test suite. > > * subversion/bindings/swig/python/tests/mergeinfo.py > (test_mergeinfo_get): Correctly formattted mergeinfo has paths > with leading slashes, which this function incorrectly didn't expect. > ]]] > > Index: subversion/bindings/swig/python/tests/mergeinfo.py > =================================================================== > --- subversion/bindings/swig/python/tests/mergeinfo.py (revision > 893993) > +++ subversion/bindings/swig/python/tests/mergeinfo.py (working copy) > @@ -107,10 +107,10 @@ > False, None, None) > expected_mergeinfo = \ > { '/trunk' : > - { 'branches/a' : [RevRange(2, 11)], > - 'branches/b' : [RevRange(9, 13)], > - 'branches/c' : [RevRange(2, 16)], > - 'trunk' : [RevRange(1, 9)], }, > + { '/branches/a' : [RevRange(2, 11)], > + '/branches/b' : [RevRange(9, 13)], > + '/branches/c' : [RevRange(2, 16)], > + '/trunk' : [RevRange(1, 9)], }, > } > self.compare_mergeinfo_catalogs(mergeinfo, expected_mergeinfo) >
I thought we were supposed to be more tolerant of mis-fomatted mergeinfo, not suddenly change the mergeinfo format? What am I missing? -- Brane
