Rebase
- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Advanced Search
Jun 17 2021
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Jun 16 2021
Rebase
Jun 15 2021
Jun 14 2021
Jun 11 2021
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Jun 10 2021
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rework commit messages
Rework commit messages
Merge requested fixes with actual revision
Updated diff with proper git revisions.
Jun 7 2021
- Added equality check functions to model classes.
- Merge branch 'master' of ssh://forge.softwareheritage.org/diffusion/222/swh-provenance
- Added test for isochrone graph topology.
- Requested fixes to CSVOriginIterator.
Jun 4 2021
I believe this can be pushed safely. The issue about invalidating frontiers and batch revision processing should be treated separately.
That's not really a problem. For files, that delta is telling you when the file was seen for the first time. For directories, it tells you when the frontiers date, that should be greater or equal to all the content's. What we discussed yesterday should fix this mismatch but I insist, this is not a bug, it's the actual expected result with the current logic.
Jun 2 2021
This diff is already accepted by ardumont, who knows SQL better than I do. There is no much for me to review here
We are about to start refactoring the provenance backend. It would be nice to have this changes pushed, since re-basing them might by complicated after refactoring.
Why would we want to do this? The actual idea is to guarantee that the commit method never fails, so we can remove the while not provenance.commit() line in the revision_add function.
May 28 2021
Not sure if I follow what the test is doing since it not clear to me what's the content of storage_and_CMDBTS, but as far as I understand this is only testing that the id and maxdate of the root node matches with what's "expected". What about the rest of the graph? The topology of the full structure should be considered (assuming we know that's storage_and_CMDBTS and how provenace was populated).