Re: [StGit PATCH 09/13] Clear up the semantics of Series.new_patch

From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 8, 2007, 13:16 UTC
Message-ID: <b0943d9e0710080616r36142946m3e24d2f6893287c9@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070914223154.7001.12254.stgit@morpheus.local>

On 14/09/2007, David Kågedal <davidk@lysator.liu.se> wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> This patch adds a number of assertions to document and verify the
> complex restrictions of the input parameters to the Series.new_patch
> function. It also adds the requirement that 'before_existing' and
> 'commit' cannot be true at the same time when calling it, instead of
> updating 'commit' inside the function.

[...]

Show 16 quoted lines

> --- a/stgit/stack.py
> +++ b/stgit/stack.py
> @@ -833,9 +833,16 @@ class Series(PatchSet):
>                    author_name = None, author_email = None, author_date = None,
>                    committer_name = None, committer_email = None,
>                    before_existing = False):
> -        """Creates a new patch
> +        """Creates a new patch, either pointing to an existing commit object,
> +        or by creating a new commit object.
>          """
>
> +        assert commit or (top and bottom)
> +        assert not before_existing or (top and bottom)
> +        assert not (commit and before_existing)
> +        assert (top and bottom) or (not top and not bottom)
> +        assert not top or (bottom == git.get_commit(top).get_parent())

The last assertion here prevents the use of 'stg pick --reverse'. This command creates an unapplied patch with top and bottom reversed and pushes it to force a three-way merge.

It seems to work OK if I comment it out but I wonder whether it will break in the future with the planned removal of the top and bottom files.

Thanks.

-- 
Catalin