From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>,
Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>,
David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: sh -x -i -v with continuous integration, was Re: [PATCH 1/4] t7601: test for pull.ff=true overrides merge.ff=false
Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 12:07:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq1tigfij8.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150516152858.GA19269@peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Sat, 16 May 2015 11:28:58 -0400")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> Do we object to having to sprinkle the "verbose" throughout the test
> scripts?
Yes.
An unconstrained "verbose" that applies to anything would make
people less careful to come up with more useful abstractions,
e.g. test_line_count, which I view as a bigger problem.
"verbose test", regardless of how it is spelled, either as two words
"verbose test", a "verbose_test" helper, or a helper function that
overrides "test", share the same issue, as their unconstrained-ness
comes from the fact that test is too broad a command. I'd rather
want to see us move more in the direction of encouraging things like
test_line_count, which makes it easier to write new tests with less
mistakes (e.g. by hiding the BSD wc pitfall "$(wc -l <file)", in
test_line_count's case).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-16 19:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-13 9:52 [PATCH 0/4] make pull.ff=true override merge.ff Paul Tan
2015-05-13 9:52 ` [PATCH 1/4] t7601: test for pull.ff=true overrides merge.ff=false Paul Tan
2015-05-14 13:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
2015-05-14 16:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-05-14 16:53 ` sh -x -i -v with continuous integration, was " Johannes Schindelin
2015-05-14 17:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-05-16 15:28 ` Jeff King
2015-05-16 19:07 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2015-05-18 18:45 ` Jeff King
2015-05-18 20:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-05-18 20:50 ` Jeff King
2015-05-18 20:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-05-16 12:33 ` Paul Tan
2015-05-13 9:52 ` [PATCH 2/4] pull: make pull.ff=true override merge.ff Paul Tan
2015-05-13 9:52 ` [PATCH 3/4] Documentation/config.txt: clarify that pull.ff overrides merge.ff Paul Tan
2015-05-13 9:52 ` [PATCH 4/4] pull: parse pull.ff as a bool or string Paul Tan
2015-05-14 12:59 ` [PATCH 0/4] make pull.ff=true override merge.ff Johannes Schindelin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-05-19 13:22 sh -x -i -v with continuous integration, was Re: [PATCH 1/4] t7601: test for pull.ff=true overrides merge.ff=false Johannes Schindelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq1tigfij8.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=davvid@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=pyokagan@gmail.com \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.