From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pull: handle --log= Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 14:37:24 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1431956396-21788-1-git-send-email-pyokagan@gmail.com> <5661061272076a1883cfde1087be4a42@www.dscho.org> <6b905c01c9b57abc05fb49117c28c10e@www.dscho.org> <1432070690.14498.4.camel@kaarsemaker.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Paul Tan , Git Mailing List , Stefan Beller , Matthieu Moy , Ramkumar Ramachandra To: Dennis Kaarsemaker X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue May 19 23:37:36 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YupCf-0006gE-LF for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 19 May 2015 23:37:34 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751988AbbESVha (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 May 2015 17:37:30 -0400 Received: from mail-ig0-f182.google.com ([209.85.213.182]:35590 "EHLO mail-ig0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751789AbbESVh0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 May 2015 17:37:26 -0400 Received: by igbyr2 with SMTP id yr2so87416246igb.0 for ; Tue, 19 May 2015 14:37:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=oDfzA57PzJSmXMnnnlpUqmlkJZ0ivvAmg2E4P3iU31I=; b=Z3LVEolWoXZjmySSlxJUVrCKaIKGAyojKFNbzjofaKEYU9EYzYJwR/P6RHOYhaV0Xr TBpKq7HKrEIldDQ5u4O3umj+BJEC21Qm1ZUdPCnP8aH9a5J/ctwet5LqrVpPeeSnr4oD zg15+l0FOpr6J8h+2oj7KfQp5JzUvqdMsZs0QiUpcOU2YQ+mCLgZ5DZBi/hoMAUeEAN0 Cd5ox38xGeCw3c/QHMc4hwI7xIGRf/bw4IgTjfNYmiW0NnxmOZ5Lmb7pJyvZeMSMjaJE 7RLAXY1VV+L/+dGfWxH5SH0t9aJstHvQbow9q634TP7qsXCfz28II5TXhc61TsWIl6i7 rutA== X-Received: by 10.107.159.7 with SMTP id i7mr26277975ioe.4.1432071445990; Tue, 19 May 2015 14:37:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:10c2:1012:6ddd:2b37:d23b:a593]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j4sm137298igo.0.2015.05.19.14.37.25 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 19 May 2015 14:37:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1432070690.14498.4.camel@kaarsemaker.net> (Dennis Kaarsemaker's message of "Tue, 19 May 2015 23:24:50 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Dennis Kaarsemaker writes: > I took a stab at this, adding a --tag option to test_commit and adding > the option to the test_commit calls that need it (or removing tests' > reliance on these tags where appropriate, or removing tests' workarounds > for dealing with these tags when they don't want them), and the result > is 59 files changed, 280 insertions(+), 281 deletions(-) > > A test run on master with GIT_TEST_LONG set causes 1138 calls to > test_commit on my system, of which 255 now use the --tag option > (measured with a really crude hack that INCR's some keys in redis at > appropriate points in test_commit). > > Is this interesting enough to turn into a proper patch series? Wow. A proper patch series would probably be [1/N] Teach "test_commit --tag" and replace existing "test_commit" with "test_commit --tag" [2-N/N] For all the test scripts, analyse and judge if they are better off with the auto-generated tags (i.e. no change wrt the result of 1/N) or tags that are created by the script at strategic places only as needed, and convert those that are better read without "test_commit --tag". [1/N] would be mechanical and easy, but justifying the change in the remainder would be a lot of work and reviewing would be, too, and would require a good taste. Perhaps if we see two sample patches to see how it looks like, would that help us decide? That is, the mechanical [1/N] and [2/N] for one of the test script that can do without --tag, and a sample "do not apply" patch to show "if we change 'test_commit --tag' to 'test_commit', the script t1234 needs this many manual tagging by the caller, and it is not worth doing"? I dunno. Thanks.