If Promote to mainline is applied to, say, 1. e4 e5 2. f4 (2. Nf3 Nc6 ) in correspondence with Nc6, it produces the following mainline: 1. e4 e5 2. Nc6.
Yes, the bug in itself is solved. You can close the bug report, provided that "mainline" is really intended as "upper variation" (which is not necessarily mainline).
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The bug is solved with commit #978.
Please note, however, that "promote to mainline" should be better called "promote to main variation". For instance:
1. e4 e5 2. f4 (2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 (3. Bc4 Nf6 ))
Applying "promote to mainline" to Nf6 yields to:
1. e4 e5 2. f4 (2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 (3. Bb5 ) 3... Nf6 )
and one has to apply it once more to Nf6 to obtain that this move is really mainline:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 (2. f4 ) 2... Nc6 3. Bc4 (3. Bb5 ) 3... Nf6
Is this intended behavior?
Should be fixed in SVN.
Yes, the bug in itself is solved. You can close the bug report, provided that "mainline" is really intended as "upper variation" (which is not necessarily mainline).
The bug has been fixed in SVN.