From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Wong Subject: Re: Extract Git classes from git-svn (2/10) (was Re: Fix git-svn tests for SVN 1.7.5.) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:58:35 +0000 Message-ID: <20120718105835.GA32215@dcvr.yhbt.net> References: <5004B772.3090806@pobox.com> <20120717174446.GA14244@burratino> <5005F164.3060300@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, robbat2@gentoo.org, Ben Walton To: Michael G Schwern X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 18 12:58:42 2012 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 1SrRxp-0001n6-Az for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:58:41 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753670Ab2GRK6h (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2012 06:58:37 -0400 Received: from dcvr.yhbt.net ([64.71.152.64]:60617 "EHLO dcvr.yhbt.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753278Ab2GRK6f (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2012 06:58:35 -0400 Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 502A71F42A; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:58:35 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5005F164.3060300@pobox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Michael G Schwern wrote: Hi Michael, thanks for taking your time to help with this. I agree with everything Jonathan said (and thank him for taking the time to point you in the right direction). I too (very strongly) prefer email for code review. I doubt I would've ever gotten involved if git were run differently. I'm actually disappointed the mailing list culture that built git hasn't rubbed off to other projects that adopt git. > +++ b/t/Git-SVN/00compile.t > +use Test::More tests => 2; I prefer not declaring test counts and using done_testing() instead. done_testing() is favorable to me in at least 2 ways: * done_testing() closely matches the behavior of the existing sh-based test suite in git (which calls test_done) * maintaining test counts leads to unnecessary merge conflicts Skipping the tests on old versions of Test::More (< 0.88) is acceptable to me (especially since integration tests provide the real coverage already). > +++ b/t/Git-SVN/Utils/can_compress.t > +use Test::More 'no_plan'; no_plan is the worst way to use Test::More, I think.