From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improved and extended t5404 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:02:20 -0800 Message-ID: <7vmythr8xf.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20071112213823.GB2918@steel.home> <20071112213938.GC2918@steel.home> <20071113075240.GA21799@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20071113194731.GC3268@steel.home> <20071113194909.GD3268@steel.home> <20071113230234.GI3268@steel.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King To: Alex Riesen X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 14 01:03:30 2007 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 1Is5j8-0001mz-Ev for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 01:03:30 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758948AbXKNACl (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:02:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757912AbXKNACl (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:02:41 -0500 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:44122 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754064AbXKNACk (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:02:40 -0500 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3182E2F0; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:03:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8B3E956DA; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:02:58 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20071113230234.GI3268@steel.home> (Alex Riesen's message of "Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:02:34 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Alex Riesen writes: > Ignore exit code of git push in t5404, as it is not relevant for the > test This proposed log message solicits a "Huh? -- Since when ignoring exit code is an improvement?" reaction. If this push is expected to error out, then wouldn't you want to make sure it errors out as expected? If the problem is that the exit status is unreliable, maybe we need to make it reliable instead?