Scenarios for Merging Proofs
From Event-B
This page is a first tentative to describe the scenario that a merge tool will have to face.
Proof structure
With respect to the merging objective, a proof is made of:
- a component name,
- a unique identifier inside that component, which is same as the PO identifier,
- a proof tree, either manual or automatic,
- a proof status (PO discharged or not by the proof tree)
- a PO sequent
Rodin database implementation
Each component
compname
is associated with:
- a compname.bprfile, which contains the proof trees associated with each PO (1/, 2/ and 3/ before).
- a compname.bpsfile, which contains the proof status associated with each PO (2/, 5/ and 3/ - discharged or not, manual or automatic)
- a compname.bpofile, which contains the PO (1/ and 2/ + PO content).
Merging scenarios
PO being uniquely identified, it may be enough to consider a merge taking place PO by PO.
In the following we call L the local database/user/branch, O the other database/user/branch and A the database which reflects the common state from which L and O have departed (A, for ancestor). We also consider L and O as being symmetrical (and thus we won't describe symmetrical scenarios).
The table hereafter described the envisioned use case.
n° | A st | L st | O st | A ma | L ma | O ma | PO L | PO O | PR L | PR O | Actions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | - | nok | nok | - | - | - | =A | /=A | - | - | get PR O (O model has changed) |
2 | nok | nok | nok | - | - | - | =A | =A | /=A | =A | get PR L (L has perhaps tried a demo) |
3 | nok | nok | nok | - | - | - | =A | =A | /=A | /=A | ask user (both PR changed) |
4 | nok | nok | nok | - | - | - | =A | =A | =A | =A | get PR L (or O, no difference) |
5 | nok | ok | nok | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | get PR L |
6 | nok | ok | ok | - | - | - | =A | /=A | - | - | get PR O, (O model has changed) |
7 | nok | ok | ok | - | - | - | =A | =A | - | - | ask user (both demo are ok) |
8 | nok | ok | ok | - | - | - | =A | =A | - | - | ask user (both model have changed) |
9 | ok | nok | nok | - | - | - | =A | =A | /=A | - | get PR A (model has not changed and was proved) |
10 | ok | nok | nok | - | - | - | =A | =A | =A | =A | get PR A (model has not changed and was proved) |
11 | ok | ok | nok | - | - | - | =A | =A | - | - | get PR L (no model has changed) |
12 | ok | ok | nok | - | ma | au | =A | /=A | - | - | get PR L (O model has changed but L had a manual proof) |
13 | ok | ok | nok | - | au | ma | =A | /=A | - | - | get PR O (O model has changed and has a manual proof) |
14 | ok | ok | nok | - | ma | ma | =A | /=A | - | /=A | get PR O (O model has changed and has a new manual proof) |
15 | ok | ok | nok | - | ma | ma | =A | /=A | - | =A | get PR O (O model has changed) |
16 | ok | ok | nok | - | au | au | =A | /=A | - | - | get PR O (O model has changed) |
17 | ok | ok | nok | - | ma | au | /=A | /=A | - | - | get PR L (both model changed but L had a manual proof) |
18 | ok | ok | nok | - | ma | ma | /=A | /=A | - | - | ask user (both model changed with manual proof) |
19 | ok | ok | nok | - | au | au | /=A | /=A | - | - | ask user (both model changed with manual proof) |
- X st: (ok,nok) proof status for X (A,O or L)
- X ma: (manual, automatic) manual status for X (A,O or L)
- PO X: po changes for X compare to others user/branch
- PR X: proof change for X, compared to others user/branch