From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.157]) (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 4BF671C5D72 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2025 18:02:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.157 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764093779; cv=none; b=k/DT/uQi1y3wTBaO4sHnRUq/UzYxrpWN5YDr7Q0TyyIHxvKDhM7lVs4Jrwtv1LRWkCA7WePwleFQM7C17LayNrYBIsRE5FhqEMiD6fYu+Cr4TMaYT/dTOfv/FX/EDspg2EFMIDcGkZIm0Aide7FM6OuqlK7tefrkQJWu6k/G51k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764093779; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qkkPdLmDTCBkQCOLV02OeM43Qivm3fw0zOP+gMvt2M4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=JlHK689plMrhdbv968s89F5Jug+vJwhvNxKog9MsPE+JPSDA8QSftwpUFiAfAz+iBOiby0PAyCicS9WoKq9blXmyg7Mbr1E5O/Rj5vv3K6zS8BCSl430J0+u4Pp3byPcsGuOM9i2diLpFJFM/hQcEHsUE7igNfh5RSrkSOUASZ4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=WGB3paWb; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=k0VzNi+h; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.157 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="WGB3paWb"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="k0VzNi+h" Received: from phl-compute-04.internal (phl-compute-04.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E4011400143; Tue, 25 Nov 2025 13:02:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-04.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 25 Nov 2025 13:02:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; 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=1764093776; x=1764180176; bh=O7nAuEnabM VtMq1CUg9JC4gZoTeZMh42T4Q9hSMWiNQ=; b=WGB3paWbPefIZkRGwDoyqjXnnk fLnUTRHFyHyyz7rszOF/+KTmJDnPEvNUC+y41YkGwkVLhZ6uEW701/w2dYkKx5dJ wAZeLVeEPNcSbc4UlM9jCtBC/k6VKd4ZkpNRWeMqaETfSR+seZ3ETyR/c9ecXyBF 96l1dgRvDXXX7dTBuV/jBLbG0CVER8yZkQ75byvA+HlQQEQxDqyF1rPhvkTWMqwz MjDW4e0Yn/dUAH4U5o28ylHJ4sz6VP/YJtPSUTwAmMjPPGdEcKL8rZqSteDX45gF gt1lWjoL4tSiHLjab6Q3xdfKw4rYDO3ibTVY2xHjqtE4qDIoWSIjieFaxnzA== 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=fm3; t= 1764093776; x=1764180176; bh=O7nAuEnabMVtMq1CUg9JC4gZoTeZMh42T4Q 9hSMWiNQ=; b=k0VzNi+ht0PNMHgxcONB4RxzX2gwA+ibwQj4fbAtM5DlfUxVyvy kD29fpTOv0dk+7EVwgozNVx18r3IRFng3UGRHr6BP+NXdg1qy9+x8/ucdbr2TVjR d6INHILh15h+1CqoWyT0GpoW3Rc4H+vPA7v+QuZCmkxbcyNlbqnbwhraOxO7MSlq oHnEVNvWLu18YaW9P9xTWo7+rhsJf+7cl0MROwIcLsjnErYgSUVLucoKrgai0jfb CRbAfFQoP38IifsXx6vecwrg+wWQ0PG6tWY233rn0drHMAoRDVBLX0h0cVWVXHJM RAbAcyy0UREgAPK3LyL2fcztZOoG4oIKMbg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggddvgedvudefucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcu vecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeufeejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeei geeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepgh hithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepudehpdhmohguvgep shhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehjohhhrghnnhgvshdrshgthhhinhguvghlihhnse hgmhigrdguvgdprhgtphhtthhopehsihguughhrghrthhhrghsthhhrghnrgefudesghhm rghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpd hrtghpthhtoheptghhrhhishhtihgrnhdrtghouhguvghrsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhr tghpthhtohepphhssehpkhhsrdhimhdprhgtphhtthhopehnvgifrhgvnhesghhmrghilh drtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehphhhilhhlihhprdifohhougduvdefsehgmhgrihhlrdgt ohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepphhhihhllhhiphdrfihoohguseguuhhnvghlmhdrohhrghdruh hkpdhrtghpthhtohepkhgrrhhthhhikhdrudekkeesghhmrghilhdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 25 Nov 2025 13:02:54 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Siddharth Asthana , git@vger.kernel.org, christian.couder@gmail.com, ps@pks.im, newren@gmail.com, phillip.wood123@gmail.com, phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk, karthik.188@gmail.com, code@khaugsbakk.name, rybak.a.v@gmail.com, jltobler@gmail.com, toon@iotcl.com, johncai86@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] replay: add --revert option to reverse commit changes In-Reply-To: <4d75da90-7e85-573a-bb10-0c63a02b076c@gmx.de> (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 25 Nov 2025 18:25:41 +0100 (CET)") References: <20251125170056.34489-1-siddharthasthana31@gmail.com> <4d75da90-7e85-573a-bb10-0c63a02b076c@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 10:02:53 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Johannes Schindelin writes: > The patch itself looks fine to me, if a bit too extensive on the side of > adding tests: Remember, a nimble test suite that catches a bug once is > better than a long-running test suite that would catch a bug several times > _iff_ it didn't tax the developer's patience so much that it is > interrupted and aborted. You probably agree that Git's CI runtimes are > already counter-productively long. I am not sure about some of the negations in the above, but it is very good to point out that tests want to cover widely but without overlap. Two tests that try to see the tool works well under identical scenarios can be better done as a single test. We do not need to catch the same bug in multiple tests, as people tend to see test breakages, update the code to fix the first one, and continue, wanting to fix more and different kind of breakages. Thanks.