Improve MergeConflictTests coverage and naming#353
Open
lukaskubanek wants to merge 2 commits intopointfreeco:mainfrom
Open
Improve MergeConflictTests coverage and naming#353lukaskubanek wants to merge 2 commits intopointfreeco:mainfrom
lukaskubanek wants to merge 2 commits intopointfreeco:mainfrom
Conversation
- Drop "merge_" prefix from first test name - Assert on privateCloudDatabase instead of container to remove unneeded shared database from snapshots - Use explicit time assignment instead of relative time increments throughout all relevant tests for consistency
Makes timing sequences explicit in test names and adds missing test case for server record edited *after* client and processed *after* client.
This was referenced Jan 2, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR completes the test matrix for conflict scenarios between server and client versions by adding the last missing test case:
serverRecordEditedAfterClientAndProcessedBeforeClient()serverRecordEditedAfterClientAndProcessedAfterClient()🆕serverRecordEditedBeforeClientAndProcessedBeforeClient()serverRecordEditedBeforeClientAndProcessedAfterClient()It also includes a few cosmetic changes to improve readability and naming consistency.
The main motivation for this PR is to provide a concrete reference for a follow-up issue about a flaw in the current “last edit wins” conflict resolution strategy. See #354.