Re: [PATCH] partial-clone: add a partial-clone test case

[Abhradeep Chakraborty <chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com>]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

> Is this "doesn't" (documenting current behaviour, without saying if
> it is wrong or is desired) or "shouldn't" (documenting the desired
> behaviour, which the current implementation may or may not satisfy)?

The current behaviour is okay and this commit adds the test case for it.
So, in that sense, I think "shouldn't" is better word.

> That's mouthful.

Sorry if the test name is very long. But, I couldn't think of shorter
test name than this - to explain what the test case is.

> Lose SP after '>'.
>
> 		git -C partial.git log --follow -- new-file.txt >"$(pwd)/trace.txt" &&

Okay.

> Looking at the implementation of the helper, it seems to be prepared
> to handle negation itself.  Shouldn't this be
>
>	test_subcommand_inexact ! fetch <trace.txt
>
> instead?

Oops, completely missed it. Correcting it :)

> Why can't you specify what should NOT come before "fetch" in your
> use of this helper?

Below is the event triggered for non-exact OID rename -

	git -c fetch.negotiationAlgorithm=noop fetch origin --no-tags --no-write-fetch-head --recurse-submodules=no --filter=blob:none --stdin

Derrick told me to not depend on other flags like
`-c fetch.negotiationAlgorithm` etc. as they might be changed or omitted
and as it makes sense to me also. That's why I didn't specify those things.

> I wonder if it was more like this that the original wanted to grep for:
>
>	grep '"event":"child_start".*\["git","pack-objects",.*\]'

I don't know about other cases, but in my case, atleast I really wanted
it.

So, In this scenerio, should I stick with `test_subcommand_inexact` or I
have to see other helper functions (or make my own) for it?