Re: [PATCH 2/2] apply: rewrite unit tests with structured cases

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

"Philip Peterson via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> From: Philip Peterson <philip.c.peterson@gmail.com>
>
> The imperative format was a little hard to read, so I rewrote the test cases
> in a declarative style by defining a common structure for each test case and
> its assertions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philip Peterson <philip.c.peterson@gmail.com>
> ---
>  t/unit-tests/t-apply.c | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  1 file changed, 78 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)

In this project, we do not add a version of a known-to-be-bad file
in patch [1/2], only to be immediately improved in patch [2/2].
Unless, of course, there is a good reason to do so.  And "to
preserve the true history of what happened in the developer's
working tree" is not a good reason.

We give our developers "rebase -i" and other means to rewrite their
Git history, not just because we want them to be able to pretend
that they are a better developer who never make such a mistake or
misdesign in the first place, but because a polished history is
easier to review in the shorter term and to maintain in the longer
term.

Thanks.