From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040681F453 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 21:52:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726270AbfBFVwT (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:52:19 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-f66.google.com ([209.85.208.66]:37225 "EHLO mail-ed1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725982AbfBFVwS (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:52:18 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f66.google.com with SMTP id h15so7283557edb.4 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2019 13:52:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=BWxHpSopynBd4cKvdRmaQ1p1FA7Xkml+hko0yvJSU9A=; b=H4VteTuxLyiLv8zmo+qBeW8pszmaViNAhFVGTCRHSX6OXJPoLLbZ/fElfW7IiPb/PD Gw0c6s4cUe8YTemhj4Xraq6SU2ROFxH2Gxzsb3CMqdxtdPCpZ3n5rbaYue8xp8FOiIck AC5KB29UdluaU+/xAEjfL+k//+nCWLzNX4F0mdpZf6AsdWktszVwKQyKzpuFxRLVwAzo nxVgvWsr4AUxKICXFAN6oO8A8VtrkTYXvIDE9R/wzuJvXamwhNCChslQ9L+baMtnceDF 4YJ7+ou2NTY0pYj2KTRqqL11kTkiyzpGaPXniDtmm4O5pkzPJp6HEyhp7nPRjpM8I7Nq ExIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=BWxHpSopynBd4cKvdRmaQ1p1FA7Xkml+hko0yvJSU9A=; b=Y4eM0jW8H9BS4mohRrvRp7I6fHyjFWYRxM4W2LIajHy6YtkfNnD0+5bci3zFOsH6ry 6MP4k6APbmFJQ+SCQSIHb5/YKKUosq5LCsatRBb7qjgdqOyLvgP8eyvBkVmWiDYXTGuB Ndio6e9AtSJymcsnvO6Vzt+ZtIBQrHewcBYXdyvabXyXlUPOJuEy6arIVQ1UxT128zKc QVhExfPPta924NR8FF9FNPVf7/FyvaQCW8HSSC39ofbTvXOO+S/4GnZBCkWn4TFkXR2q CQBSL5Vgs/kAabzsrRDvPkPlgJZ/G/0Zqz0vbjLbKN/eQLqXsxfsM0QS8yKr1N3gl8gp gl+w== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZ2YjIkX4V5mEUEocO2bnX/MTPXj57DwtX7E+106mdlRYMTQ8F4 KP7/YzOBzn1iRYzs8QEhQEI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYDc9adjBSHYtdPrZa1R0Nxct+9U4zdXsbuc19Rhzx2j1fw9m6BuS2h7uJsTk/OMcsRHB9Mmg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:45c1:: with SMTP id z1mr9084374ejq.79.1549489936984; Wed, 06 Feb 2019 13:52:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from evledraar (dhcp-077-251-215-224.chello.nl. [77.251.215.224]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id gf12sm3755895ejb.26.2019.02.06.13.52.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 06 Feb 2019 13:52:16 -0800 (PST) From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Jeff King Cc: Jonathan Tan , git@vger.kernel.org, steadmon@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Resend of GIT_TEST_PROTOCOL_VERSION patches References: <20190206213458.GC12737@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux buster/sid; Emacs 26.1; mu4e 1.1.0 In-reply-to: <20190206213458.GC12737@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 22:52:15 +0100 Message-ID: <87ef8klh4g.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 06 2019, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 04:21:14PM -0800, Jonathan Tan wrote: > >> This is on the latest master (8feddda32c ("Fifth batch for 2.21", >> 2019-02-05)) + js/protocol-advertise-multi. >> >> This is a resend of [1], which was built on the result of merging many >> branches. Now that most of the branches have been merged to master, I >> have rebased it on master. The only branch that I needed to merge was >> js/protocol-advertise-multi. > > Thanks for working on this. With the exception of the final patch, this > all seems pretty sane to me from a quick look. > > There is one thing that your test patches made me wonder. When we have > to make an exception to a test (i.e., that doesn't work under v2), you > do it by unsetting GIT_TEST_PROTOCOL_VERSION in the environment. That > means we'll actually run the test, but not with the version that the > caller specified. > > I wonder if it would be more obvious what's going on if we instead had a > prereq like: > > test_expect_success !PROTO_V2 'ls-remote --symref' ' > ... > ' > > and just skipped those tests entirely (and in a way that appears in the > TAP output). > > I think it would also future-proof us a bit for v2 becoming the default > (i.e., when GIT_TEST_PROTOCOL_VERSION being blank does mean "use v2"). > > I dunno. It probably doesn't matter all that much, so it may not be > worth going back and changing at this point. Just a thought. So far we've had the convention that these GIT_TEST_* variables, e.g. the one for the commit graph, work the same way. Thus we guarantee that we get (in theory) 100% coverage even when running the tests in this special mode. I think it's better to keep it as-is.