From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3404: extra checks and s/! git/test_must_fail git/ Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 02:46:08 -0700 Message-ID: <7v4p7nazof.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080620190037.GE7369@leksak.fem-net> <1213986614-19536-1-git-send-email-s-beyer@gmx.net> <20080620190037.GE7369@leksak.fem-net> <20080621071812.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com> <20080621014636.GG7369@leksak.fem-net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: nanako3@lavabit.com, Brandon Casey , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Christian Couder To: Stephan Beyer X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jun 21 11:47:25 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K9zgn-0006Lz-EN for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 11:47:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752646AbYFUJqY (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jun 2008 05:46:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752659AbYFUJqY (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jun 2008 05:46:24 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:38887 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752344AbYFUJqX (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jun 2008 05:46:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB84A70E; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 05:46:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 176BFA70D; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 05:46:13 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E7E723DC-3F76-11DD-89CF-CE28B26B55AE-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Stephan Beyer writes: >> > Perhaps I'm not consequent, but I thought that it's not worth it ;-) >> >> Doesn't that logic make the other s/!/test_must_fail/ changes >> also not worth it? What is the reason behind the change? > > The s/!/test_must_fail/ is just an "extra" like > "Hey, you're currently standing, can you bring me some tea?" Counting the places that were affected, I would not call which one is primary change and which one is extra. The later half of your patch is all about test_must_fail isn't it? I am all for making tests more careful, and I think more use of test_must_fail makes quite a lot of sense. Please don't do a half-ass job if you are doing the conversion anyway. About the commit log message, I tend to agree that your original subject looked ugly and it would have been nicer to just say "t3404: more strict tests for git-rebase" or something like that, but probably an empty commit message body would have been Ok.