From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b6-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b6-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F2CC2913 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:43:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.149 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734878616; cv=none; b=rBsBtDzmMwG0EMG+mFcRnYg/mQtF/KBjLjSGKvK/Keh6iAy4zvF2ZAsMb8moqCa3pOHAZ/UmDXjgaiFrqCrsKWoFCKt8238X8id48n5GWhBNgFdpRbezVLKv1eqvRYz+UYxIhOiPnD1l2jm+9gPR58Kc6dFhpVN+0Q/G+1J4AA8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734878616; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fsRFkYoZhDiM8imCIUfQOaVBiwsUdcbY9PY4ShVbhpQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=QzleeGsG2UfYtZwe1Ls29s/yFeTd5eYQ8Nm4FJpzS5Pd7Yx7nca0JxeAPih4I5iCKEmvEU5eEFrOHb9c05St5p68TTt7T8E1rrSA/rQPfiW4TDFcfTjEU8/s6aSA9Es8ZUQSHRe8hAbctHSVUR0GI9WSCbyjgsbXsMT5SlXXKK4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=bNaCuBjq; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=OyhPmNrP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.149 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="bNaCuBjq"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="OyhPmNrP" Received: from phl-compute-12.internal (phl-compute-12.phl.internal [10.202.2.52]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F8411400C7; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 09:43:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-12.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 22 Dec 2024 09:43:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1734878611; x=1734965011; bh=4Yt1Ad/yTt sqjxg3MXyHyw1YoG/QyBD0uEsgIVxFTxQ=; b=bNaCuBjqpH/UXkGIneCIBK45JA zPiNC/IvxOtYRy/bWHYhV0iaF+AVleQV9ZMdesYdx/6j19Ew4YU+baggwJhqTycI idgbI6LI7PjkLZqJhZl8Lk8JWGPLznVoigU4tUsUyQieJtiANgtJ7PNs+xYZQDq/ 8efPRvGRQnnGBGbJkhF6pN0PMpJC/kPcKaG+Uv8Dl1xbUTAxd2zqHv9Sb+h9GS0K mmBolWn91u12gYMklrBFKta5cRe1KeDQK1mgeT3Ys/0So1R8I7mjcj8dV33Z8wv+ hb766eNp1Qp7od4Z/pYT9hTTtdlo1X1LYGpaMpCiEg3i+2PVeuN9l+1KxFgQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1734878611; x=1734965011; bh=4Yt1Ad/yTtsqjxg3MXyHyw1YoG/QyBD0uEs gIVxFTxQ=; b=OyhPmNrPd7RfANst4XIPkyl/c1H76sRAIY9oGWHqnrPLeOnZYfv qSsyaXH5x0feQBaOYv/SJ3Bek2zBLeNHBTgpiY/XgsNRildYJ+YVxWxe+xasN/K5 nHWukC2otmvBWc6bdQJrLTy3Xp3QUVZtT+NUQWdJoir6L3zYaQtykJwPK8W4cZSW MiQP9EvJexq8EyFI0WZLuWX3WHRkdwOr1dzwNhXmG6GfxL/wRtb9pO4T48coCr1C d80LdStr5Gj/7vUtRJzW4L4p0ddqeSxpIdLtJR8gJAWxEnSk78UAl9UGrYMU0ctp Io8uxS3rYsVVL4LR/Ihndv5j50HCWbfqPgw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefuddruddtkedgieejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnh htshculddquddttddmnegoufhushhpvggtthffohhmrghinhculdegledmnecujfgurhep fffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomheprfgrthhrihgtkhcuuf htvghinhhhrghrughtuceophhssehpkhhsrdhimheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepteev vdetteegueelveeitdfhgeevhfeufefffeeiudegtdekkeehtddvheeutefgnecuffhomh grihhnpehgihhtlhgrsgdrihhonecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghm pehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphhssehpkhhsrdhimhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepfedpmhhoug gvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepkhhufhhorhhijhhileeksehgmhgrihhlrdgt ohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepphhhihhllhhiphdrfihoohguseguuhhnvghlmhdrohhrghdruh hkpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 09:43:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by vm-mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 74475847 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Sun, 22 Dec 2024 14:41:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 15:41:47 +0100 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Seyi Chamber Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Phillip Wood Subject: Re: [Outreachy] Blog: Introducing myself as an intern working to convert unit test to use clar Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sun, Dec 22, 2024 at 02:22:38PM +0100, Seyi Chamber wrote: > On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 at 08:23, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 11:37:23AM +0100, Seyi Chamber wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > I just published a new blog post on unit test scripts I've selected > > > and prioritized for initial conversion to clar. I would love for you > > > to check it out and share your opinion! > > > > > > Find the link here: > > > https://seyi-kuforiji-902b48.gitlab.io/posts/week-2-prioritizing-test-scripts > > > > Thanks for the blog post! The initial selection looks reasonable to me. > > I was wondering whether it would make sense to evict "t-reftable-tree.c" > > out of the first batch and then handle all reftable-related tests in a > > single patch series. But we've got 9 of those, some of which are quite > > complex, so that patch series would become quite large overall. So I > > guess it's sensible to distribute the conversion of the reftable tests > > across different patch series. > > > > Patrick > > I suppose I could still make that work if that's your recommendation. > I could divide the reftable-related tests into two sets and then treat > them together. What do you think? I'll leave it up to you, as there is no "right" or "wrong" in this context. Patrick