On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Jeff Sipek <jef...@josefsipek.net> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:31:04PM +0200, Per Cederqvist wrote:
>> When the option is true (the default), Guilt does not create a new Git
>> branch when patches are applied. This way, you can switch between
>> Guilt 0.35 and the current version of Guilt with no issues.
>>
>> At a future time, maybe a year after Guilt with guilt.reusebranch
>> support is released, the default should be changed to "false" to take
>> advantage of the ability to use a separate Git branch when patches are
>> applied.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Per Cederqvist <ced...@opera.com>
>> ---
>> guilt | 28 +++-
>> regression/scaffold | 1 +
>> regression/t-062.out | 441
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> regression/t-062.sh | 137 ++++++++++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 601 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 regression/t-062.out
>> create mode 100755 regression/t-062.sh
> ...
>> diff --git a/guilt b/guilt
>> index 9947acc..7c830eb 100755
>> --- a/guilt
>> +++ b/guilt
> ...
>> @@ -928,13 +935,22 @@ else
>> die "Unsupported operating system: $UNAME_S"
>> fi
>>
>> -if [ "$branch" = "$raw_git_branch" ] && [ -n "`get_top 2>/dev/null`" ]
>> -then
>> - # This is for compat with old repositories that still have a
>> - # pushed patch without the new-style branch prefix.
>> - old_style_prefix=true
>> +if [ -n "`get_top 2>/dev/null`" ]; then
>> + # If there is at least one pushed patch, we set
>> + # old_style_prefix according to how it was pushed. It is only
>> + # possible to change the prefix style while no patches are
>> + # applied.
>> + if [ "$branch" = "$raw_git_branch" ]; then
>> + old_style_prefix=true
>> + else
>> + old_style_prefix=false
>> + fi
>> else
>> - old_style_prefix=false
>> + if $reuse_branch; then
>> + old_style_prefix=true
>> + else
>> + old_style_prefix=false
>> + fi
>
> I don't know if this is a good idea or not, but:
>
> old_style_prefix="$reuse_branch"
It saves a few lines. I'll use that construct in v3.
>> fi
>>
>> _main "$@"
>> diff --git a/regression/scaffold b/regression/scaffold
>> index e4d7487..e4d2f35 100644
>> --- a/regression/scaffold
>> +++ b/regression/scaffold
>> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ function setup_git_repo
>> git config log.date default
>> git config log.decorate no
>> git config guilt.diffstat false
>> + git config guilt.reusebranch false
>> }
>>
>> function setup_guilt_repo
> ...
>> diff --git a/regression/t-062.sh b/regression/t-062.sh
>> new file mode 100755
>> index 0000000..85596ca
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/regression/t-062.sh
>> @@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
> ...
Hidden here was a broken comment. The new one at the start
of the file will say:
# Test that the guilt.reusebranch=true setting works.
This entire file is mostly a copy of t-061.sh, but slightly
adjusted to use guilt.reusebranch=true. I'm not sure it
covers all that should be tested. On the other hand, I'm
not sure how much that setting needs to be tested.
>> +function fixup_time_info
>> +{
>> + touch -a -m -t "$TOUCH_DATE" ".git/patches/master/$1"
>> +}
>> +
>> +cmd setup_repo
>> +
>> +cmd git config guilt.reusebranch true
>> +
>> +cmd guilt push -a
>> +cmd list_files
>> +cmd git for-each-ref
>> +
>> +cmd git for-each-ref
>> +
>> +cmd list_files
>
> duplicate list_files & for-each-ref
Fixed.
>> +
>> +for i in `seq 5`; do
>> + if [ $i -ge 5 ]; then
>> + shouldfail guilt pop
>> + else
>> + cmd guilt pop
>> + fi
>> + cmd git for-each-ref
>> + cmd guilt push
>> + cmd git for-each-ref
>> + cmd guilt pop
>> + cmd git for-each-ref
>> +done
>> +
>> +# Check that "pop -a" does the right thing.
>
> What exactly is the right thing? no-op since the above loop poped
> everything? (I'd make the comment say what the "right thing" is.)
I'll rephrase that block of code like this:
# Check that "pop -a" properly pops all patches.
cmd guilt push -a
cmd git for-each-ref
cmd guilt pop -a
cmd git for-each-ref
Is that more clear? The test pushes all patches, checks that they
are applied, removes them, checks that it worked.
> Jeff.
>
> --
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like
> that.
> - Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
