Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <[email protected]> writes: > of things you think we should be putting in the test suite. I.e. > should the tests be: > > a) Only be a collection of invocations of git we'd be comfortable > showing to someone as "this works, and this is how you should do it", > or things that explicitly fail marked with test_must_fail. > > b) or a) && also various surprising combinations of things we don't > necessarily want to encourage or even support in the future, but which > are in there so if we change them, we at least know our change changed > something that worked before.
I am strongly inclined to (a). If we cannot decide when we designed the feature, and we anticipate that we may want to change it later, then documenting the choice in a test or two may be a way to remind the choice we happened to have made, but in general I do not think we want to promise (to ourselves) more than what we are willing to commit to.
