From: David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com>
To: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add --gui option to mergetool
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 04:39:34 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170303123934.4cau7ansprx2xpc7@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170303115738.GA13211@arch-attack.localdomain>
On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 03:57:38AM -0800, Denton Liu wrote:
> This fixes the discrepancy between difftool and mergetool where the
> former has the --gui flag and the latter does not by adding the
> functionality to mergetool.
>
> Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
> ---
> Documentation/git-mergetool.txt | 8 +++++++-
> contrib/completion/git-completion.bash | 3 ++-
> git-mergetool.sh | 5 ++++-
> t/t7610-mergetool.sh | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 4 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Would you mind splitting up this patch so that the
completion part is done separately?
> diff --git a/t/t7610-mergetool.sh b/t/t7610-mergetool.sh
> index 381b7df45..5683907ab 100755
> --- a/t/t7610-mergetool.sh
> +++ b/t/t7610-mergetool.sh
> @@ -145,6 +147,30 @@ test_expect_success 'custom mergetool' '
> git commit -m "branch1 resolved with mergetool"
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'gui mergetool' '
> + test_when_finished "git reset --hard" &&
> + test_when_finished "git config merge.tool mytool" &&
> + test_when_finished "git config --unset merge.guitool" &&
> + git config merge.tool badtool &&
> + git config merge.guitool mytool &&
> + git checkout -b test$test_count branch1 &&
> + git submodule update -N &&
> + test_must_fail git merge master >/dev/null 2>&1 &&
It'd probably be better to use test_expect_code instead of
test_must_fail here:
test_expect_code 1 git merge master ...
> + ( yes "" | git mergetool -g both >/dev/null 2>&1 ) &&
> + ( yes "" | git mergetool -g file1 file1 ) &&
> + ( yes "" | git mergetool --gui file2 "spaced name" >/dev/null 2>&1 ) &&
> + ( yes "" | git mergetool --gui subdir/file3 >/dev/null 2>&1 ) &&
I realize that this test is based on an existing one, but I'm curious..
is "yes" used above because it's prompting, and using -y or --no-prompt
here would eliminate the need for the 'yes ""' parts?
Looks good otherwise.
Thanks,
--
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-03 13:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-03 11:57 [PATCH 1/3] Add --gui option to mergetool Denton Liu
2017-03-03 12:39 ` David Aguilar [this message]
2017-03-03 18:06 ` Rémi Galan Alfonso
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=20170303123934.4cau7ansprx2xpc7@gmail.com \
--to=davvid@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liu.denton@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).