On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:25:24 +0100: >> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Philip Martin >> <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> wrote: >> > Johan Corveleyn <jcor...@gmail.com> writes: >> > >> >> Or, maybe the best approach: I could add a regression test for these >> >> issues, so we can all be sure that they are fixed (and remain fixed), >> >> after which they can be marked as fixed. >> > >> > Yes, please. Are there any existing XFAIL tests that apply? They >> > sometimes don't XPASS automatically when the bug is fixed because the >> > test expectation is wrong. >> >> Doh, it seems that issue #3474 already has a test, which PASSes (added >> by Bert, which he mentioned in a comment in the issue): >> >> PASS: copy_tests.py 81: copy of new dir with copied file keeps history >> >> This is exactly what issue #3474 is about. Bert added the test as >> XFAIL in r938071, and it was marked PASS by you, Philip, in r955334. >> >> So, I guess this wraps up that issue: can someone mark it as resolved? >> > > Could you mark it as resolved? Or don't you have the necessary > permissions on tigris?
Ok, done (didn't know I could do that myself :-)). >> There was a slight confusion when I read the test code, because a >> comment still talks about the tests as "Currently this fails because >> ...". The following patch removes that obsolete comment: >> >> [[[ >> Index: subversion/tests/cmdline/copy_tests.py >> =================================================================== >> --- subversion/tests/cmdline/copy_tests.py (revision 1035851) >> +++ subversion/tests/cmdline/copy_tests.py (working copy) >> @@ -4358,8 +4358,6 @@ def copy_added_dir_with_copy(sbox): >> 'NewDir2/mu' : Item(status='A ', copied='+', wc_rev='-'), >> }) >> >> - # Currently this fails because NewDir2/mu loses its history in the copy >> - # from NewDir to NewDir2 >> svntest.actions.run_and_verify_status(wc_dir, expected_status) >> >> > > +1, but could you add a link to the issue (in a comment) while you're > there? Committed in r1036306. Cheers, -- Johan