Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes:
> Carlos Martín Nieto <c...@elego.de> writes:
>> As a result of making --unset-upstream fail if the given branch
>> doesn't exist, I discovered a copy-paste error in on the the tests in
>> the patch after it, so I'm resending the whole thing.
>> The changes from the last reroll are the tightening of the situations
>> where git will show an error message (not it's just if the branch is
>> new and exists as remote-tracking) which I already sent as a reply in
>> the other thread; and making --unset-upstream error out on bad input,
>> which I already mentioned above.
> In addition to "--unset-upstream must fail on i-dont-exist branch"
> in [2/3], I am wondering if we would want to also make sure the
> command fails when the upstream information is not set for the
> branch, i.e. something like the following on top.
> What do you think?
> t/t3200-branch.sh | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> diff --git i/t/t3200-branch.sh w/t/t3200-branch.sh
> index 1018e8b..a0aaedd 100755
> --- i/t/t3200-branch.sh
> +++ w/t/t3200-branch.sh
> @@ -393,7 +393,9 @@ test_expect_success 'test --unset-upstream on HEAD' \
> git branch --set-upstream-to my14 &&
> git branch --unset-upstream &&
> test_must_fail git config branch.master.remote &&
> - test_must_fail git config branch.master.merge'
> + test_must_fail git config branch.master.merge &&
> + test_must_fail git branch --unset-upstream
Yeah, this looks good, makes sure that it will still behave correctly
even if the code path for these two situations diverges.
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