git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: StGIT rebasing safeguard

From
Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org>
Date
Jun 14, 2007, 21:30 UTC
Message-ID
<20070614213032.GR6992@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net>
In-Reply-To
<20070613203821.GQ6992@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net>
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 10:38:21PM +0200, Yann Dirson wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> > The HEAD in my repository fails the test suite. Do you have any
> > additional patches pending (some patches were not applied in order as
> > I had to manually fix the conflicts). Anyway, please check my
> > repository for any missing patches.
> 
> Oh, I had not noticed you had applied
> bd69feaf7c3c94b6e7e216ea8091064af9cdfa97.  Sorry, I was not explicit
> enough when posing this, only the cover mail included "RFC" in the
> subject.  As described in that mail, there are problems both with the
> original approach (Karl's test failing), and with that new one (that
> exisiting test failing).
> 
> Do you have any idea on how we could overcome the problem ?  In the
> meantime, we could possibly just comment that testcase out (or add
> support for continuing the testsuite even with a failure) - the
> problem it exhibits is probably less common than the one that was
> fixed.

Well, the patch I just sent which adds GIT_SKIP_TESTS support allows to see that this patch indeed breaks another test - the testsuite can be forced to skip them [1] for the sake of checking one did not break anything else, but the second test that does not pass is annoying as well, due to a similar problem:

When the parent branch is a rewinding one (eg. an stgit stack), then the old version of the patch will be turned to unreachable by pull/rebase, and we probably have even no way of telling stgit that it is indeed expected, since the parent stack is a local one. My own workflow on StGIT is affected by the issue, since my "bugs" stack is forked off my "master" stack (but hopefully an hydra will help me ;).

That makes me suspecting the reachability approach is a dead-end, and we should either get back to the approach of recording old-base, or find another solution.

Best regards,
-- 
Yann

[1] GIT_SKIP_TESTS='t2100.4 t2102.3' make test
Previous: Yann DirsonNext: Catalin Marinas
Message 6 of 14 in “Cleanups of the Series object.”
  1. 0/4 Cleanups of the Series object.Yann Dirson, Jun 11, 2007
  2. 1/4 Use get/set_name for a stack's name.Yann Dirson, Jun 11, 2007
  3. 2/4 Abstract a PatchSet object out of Series.Yann Dirson, Jun 11, 2007
  4. Catalin MarinasJun 12, 2007
  5. Yann DirsonJun 13, 2007
  6. Yann DirsonJun 14, 2007
  7. Catalin MarinasJun 19, 2007
  8. Catalin MarinasJun 19, 2007
  9. Yann DirsonJun 19, 2007
  10. Catalin MarinasJun 14, 2007
  11. Yann DirsonJun 15, 2007
  12. Catalin MarinasJun 19, 2007
  13. 3/4 Move stack format-version checks into Stack class.Yann Dirson, Jun 11, 2007
  14. 4/4 Rename branch.*.stgitformatversion to branch.*.stgit.stackformatversion.Yann Dirson, Jun 11, 2007

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.