From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2014, #03; Fri, 14) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 11:53:06 -0700 Message-ID: References: <53240C0F.2050204@web.de> <906CACC0-FB16-4BB8-812D-59067DE0CC89@quendi.de> <0CF0981E-FFF8-4A38-B690-17826686BEA6@quendi.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Torsten =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=B6gershausen?= , "git\@vger.kernel.org" , Antoine Pelisse To: Max Horn X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 19 19:53:17 2014 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 1WQLc4-0005a6-7I for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 19:53:16 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753374AbaCSSxL (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Mar 2014 14:53:11 -0400 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:33030 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752021AbaCSSxJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Mar 2014 14:53:09 -0400 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2861274C9A; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 14:53:09 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=3lszXc5fKxAx2s1B+WJpyJDICug=; b=NYiNym v97u6cNYpAAJXoGfnBFY0GA1ki+lzBP7ZQwVzsSMkpadPZQq9RGrx2IDU/60t9L3 eZh+OrlHU2U8FaQud4KGVEDbHCqixC9HHkicbNh5kBU9yxAyeQHHhnUCWFCssk0V OMsnWHjSj/hwQf41unywrfWHpe81Ap+Y+kiKQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=o1g8DZfNQfc8XnY0qtOmh+FP1zJKvR+W C4wM8nB+ThZk4X7gDzTvALWGkysAlLyeXCN7FLr+63vuBG9+QlqXBF5ngER8NCbK 46eWNXrSfFtGaPXwHIlRcygAwcUaF9xnMTnnflYU/GUyrHXgR3Mals4JzRu8KqzB PHqwM41m+j4= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11EA674C99; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 14:53:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [72.14.226.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 62E1F74C98; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 14:53:08 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <0CF0981E-FFF8-4A38-B690-17826686BEA6@quendi.de> (Max Horn's message of "Wed, 19 Mar 2014 18:21:04 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B644FBDC-AF97-11E3-9183-8D19802839F8-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Max Horn writes: > So, one more silly (bikeshedding) question: should I do this as one big > patch adding multiple xfail tests - or one commit per test, with perhaps a > brief description of the issue at hand? Or should a code comment next to > the failing test explain things? Judging from the next paragraph, one patch per issue sounds like a good organization to help those who would want to fix these issues. > Actually, some of those bugs might require a lengthy background > explanation, so yet another variant would be to write an email here > With an explanation, then add a gmane ref to the commit message... Please first try to find a way that does not need any external references---not everybody is always online. A two-page description in the log message for a new five-line test_expect_fail piece is perfectly fine.