We had a test where the destination of a copy was removed and then
added back. This patch adds similar cases where the break in history
instead happens to the source file. There are three versions of this:
- The break happens before the rename.
- The break happens on a branch parallel to the rename (where copy tracing is done via the merge base)
- The source is added on each side of the merge base. The break in history is thus in the form of a deletion when going backwards to the merge base and the re-add happens on the other branch.
I've also added calls to hg graft in these cases to show the
breakage in issue 6163.
Another factor in these cases is matching nodeid (checked in
copies._tracefile()). I've made two copies each of the cases to show
the impact of that. One of these is the same as a test in
test-rename-merge1.t, so I also deleted that test from there.
Some of these tests currently fail, where "fail" is based on my
current thinking of how things should work. I had initially thought
that we should be more strict about not tracing copies across commits
where the file did not exist, but issue 6163 made me reconsider.
The only test case here that behaved differently in 4.9 is the
exact case reported in issue 6163.