Re: [PATCH] [GSoC Patch] Modernize Test Path Checking: test -(e|f|d)

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:

> Thanks for submitting this GSoC microproject. See comments below...
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 7:58 AM Sampriyo Guin via GitGitGadget
> <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: rimo <sampriyoguin@gmail.com>
>
> This name should match the Signed-off-by: name. Since the "From:"
> header is generated from the author information in the commit, you
> probably need to adjust your "user.name" configuration to fix this.
>
>> test -e changed to test_path_exists
>> test -f changed to test_path_is_file
>
> People reading the patch would like to know why a change is being
> made, so this is where you should explain the reason (for instance,
> "the test_path_* functions provide better diagnostics upon failure" or
> such). As Karthik mentioned[*], read the "Describe your changes well"
> section in Documentation/SubmittingPatches to learn how to craft a
> good commit message.
>
> [*]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAOLa=ZSkMp+H9PZeBZXK47=fx1sH=S54AuPT=oUosm7F7V8MGg@mail.gmail.com/
>
>> Signed-off-by: Sampriyo Guin <sampriyoguin@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>     , Jialuo She shejialuo@gmail.com , Christian Couder
>>     christian.couder@gmail.com, Ghanshyam Thakkar shyamthakkar001@gmail.com
>
> It appears that GitGitGadget didn't like how this list was formatted.
> Instead, place each recipient on its own Cc: line.
>
>>  t/chainlint/chained-subshell.expect | 2 +-
>>  t/chainlint/chained-subshell.test   | 2 +-
>>  t/chainlint/function.expect         | 2 +-
>>  t/chainlint/function.test           | 2 +-
>>  4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Let's not touch any of the "chainlint" files; they are checking
> validity of a completely separate tool ("chainlint"), and have nothing
> to do with checking Git itself. Instead, pick one of the t/t???-*.sh
> files.

Yeah, these changes to make them use test_path_* are not "fixes" but
something else.  The first step for a contributor is to understand
why "test_path_*" are preferred over "test -[def]" and in what
context, but touching these files shows that such understanding is
missing, unfortunately.

I find the "as specified in Git Microprojects" in the patch
description the most disturbing,

    A simple fix as specified in Git Microprojects.

as it may be an indication that some introductory write-up is
misleading potential students in a wrong direction.  Our mentors may
need a bit more handholding at this early stage of dipping your toes
in the water step, perhaps?  Or is it up to the aspiring students to
do their homework?