On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes: > >> We don't need a bare 'server' and an intermediary 'public'. The repos >> can talk to each other directly; that's what we want to exercise. > > The previous patch to remove the test (the one that covered a case > where a bug was fixed in an older git-remote-testpy and tried to > catch the bug when it resurfaced) made sense even with its > ultra-short justification "irrelevant". > > But I am not sure if this one is so cut-and-dried. The repos can > talk to each other directly, but at the same time the tests were > exercising interactions between bare and non-bare repositories, > weren't they? Talking to each other may be one of the things we > want to exercise, but that does not necessarily be the only thing. > > If it were explained like this (note that I am *guessing* what you > meant to achieve by this patch, which may be wrong, in which case > the log message needs further clarification): > > Going through an intermediary 'public' may have exercised > interactions among combinations of bare and non-bare > repositories a bit more, but that is not an issue specific > to the remote-helper transfer that we want to be testing in > this script. Simplify the tests to let two repositories > talk directly with each other.
Right. I don't think bare vs. non-bare has anything to do with it; the intermediary repository was there to have 3 types of repos interacting with each other local testpy, remote testpy, local git. But this doesn't exercise anything from transport helper. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras -- 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
