Re: [PATCH 2/2] format-patch: fix leak of rev_info in prepare_bases()

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

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

>> Likewise I find the dual clang/gcc jobs to be overkill. Compiling with
>> both is useful, as they have different warnings. But have we ever seen a
>> case where running the tests showed a different result with different
>> compilers?
>
> Not that I'd know of. As you say, I think it makes sense to use
> different compilers in general. But I don't really think we need to have
> this as a full "compiler x tests" matrix.

Very true.  Different configurations with TEST-vars are great
combination to test, but we are not in the business of hunting bugs
in clang/gcc so we long as they compile (instead of warning "hey,
that construct gives you undefined behaviour"), we shouldn't have to
run the test suite with the same configuration for both.

> I'm certainly on board with reducing the test matrix a bit. I'm sure
> that we can have a cleverer selection of jobs where we both have the
> same test coverage as we have right now while running less jobs overall.

Yeah, and if we can spend the saved cycles for better coverage, that
would be grat.