On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 4:18 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> 
> wrote:
>> Add a test balloon to see if we get complaints from anybody who is
>> using a shell that doesn't support the "local" keyword. If so, this
>> test can be reverted. If not, we might want to consider using "local"
>> in shell code throughout the git code base.
>
> I would guess that the number of people who actually run the Git test
> suite is microscopic compared to the number of people who use Git
> itself. It is not clear, therefore, that lack of reports of failure of
> the new test would imply that "local" can safely be used throughout
> the Git code base. At best, it might indicate that "local" can be used
> in the tests.
>
> Or, am I missing something?
>

I don't think you're missing anything. I think the idea here is: "do
any users who actively run the test suite care if we start using
local". I don't think the goal is to allow use of local in non-test
suite code. At least, that's not how I interpreted it.

Thus it's fine to be only as part of a test and see if anyone
complains, since the only people affected would be those which
actually run the test suite...

Changing our requirement for regular shell scripts we ship seems a lot
trickier to gauge.

Thanks,
Jake

Reply via email to