On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 12:21:48AM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> > * fc/fast-export-fixes (2012-11-08) 14 commits
>> > - fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs
>> > - fast-export: make sure updated refs get updated
>> > - fast-export: fix comparison in tests
>> > - fast-export: trivial cleanup
>> > - remote-testgit: make clear the 'done' feature
>> > - remote-testgit: report success after an import
>> > - remote-testgit: exercise more features
>> > - remote-testgit: cleanup tests
>> > - remote-testgit: remove irrelevant test
>> > - remote-testgit: get rid of non-local functionality
>> > - Add new simplified git-remote-testgit
>> > - Rename git-remote-testgit to git-remote-testpy
>> > - remote-testgit: fix direction of marks
>> > - fast-export: avoid importing blob marks
>> > Improvements to fix fast-export bugs, including how refs pointing to
>> > already-seen commits are handled. An earlier 4-commit version of this
>> > series looked good to me, but this much-expanded version has not seen
>> > any comments.
>> > Needs review.
>> I can send the previous 4-commit version if needed, the only thing
>> that changed is the commit messages.
> In the actual code, perhaps, but aren't there significant changes to the
> git-remote-testgit infrastructure that were not originally present? That
> could use some review.
> I also seem to recall that the tests in this version rely on the presence of
> don't we still need to mark the tests with a prerequisite?
I meant in the 4-commits.
>> > * fc/completion-test-simplification (2012-10-29) 2 commits
>> > - completion: simplify __gitcomp test helper
>> > - completion: refactor __gitcomp related tests
>> > Clean up completion tests.
>> > There were some comments on the list.
>> > Expecting a re-roll.
>> The second patch I can re-roll, but the first patch needs some
>> external input. My preference is that tests should also be simple and
>> maintainable, SZEDER's preference is that tests are better being
>> explicit and verbose (even if harder to maintain) to minimize possible
>> issues in the tests.
> I think it is better to keep the tests simple and maintainable. If there
> are multiple ways to do things and they all need testing, then that
> should be clear from the tests, not done haphazardly because some tests
> happen to use a different way of doing things.
Good, that's what my first patch does; no functional changes, just
refactor code into a single function.
> I seem to recall there was a one-liner fix that needed to be rolled in,
> which is why I held it out of next.
Yes, that I can reroll.
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