Thus said "Joe Mistachkin" on Tue, 28 Jul 2015 21:02:49 -0700: > It might be nice to have test coverage for the new command.
Ok, this has been added: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/artifact/c380f431db6dd227 Thanks for suggesting this as it was most instrumental in discovering a segfault, which is avoided with: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/e4b5c2c2271e9949 http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/fbf3a5dd87d55c27 And a test for it here: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/artifact/c380f431db6dd2278924e2e8c80e916b5c54923f?txt=1&ln=386,390 All of the tests in amend.test are passing now. I think that the only coverage that is lacking is coverage for canceling all the various special tags which might exist on a checkin. Those I verified manually via ``fossil ui'', but that's because it isn't implemented in ``fossil amend.'' Should it be? This includes, for example, canceling the hidden or the closed tag on a checkin, which currently only get exercised in the UI. Any other suggestions? Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000000055c2f12a _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
