Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> writes:
> Kyle Meyer <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> a2d5156c2b (resolve_gitlink_ref: ignore non-repository paths,
>> 2016-01-22) added a test to t3000-ls-files-others.sh to check that
>> 'ls-files -o' does not die() when given a subdirectory that looks like
>> a repository but is actually a subdirectory containing a bogus .git
>> file.
>>
>> Move this test to a separate file in preparation for testing scenarios
>> with non-submodule repositories that are not bogus.
>
> It is unclear to me why this is needed.
It's not needed. My thinking, which I didn't do a good job of spelling
out above, is
We're going to be adding a test that checks how 'ls-files -o'
handles a few different scenarios involving untracked repositories.
This new test should go into a separate file rather than
t3000-ls-files-others.sh because it substantially changes the shared
directory layout that the t3000 tests work on. Like the upcoming
test, the "non-submodule .git" test from t3000 deals with a (bogus)
untracked repository, so let's split it off into a separate test
file that will be extended with the other scenarios.
Perhaps that's not a good reason to touch t3000, though. I could drop
this patch, as well as the next one, and just add the new test file in
the final patch.
>> +++ b/t/t3009-ls-files-others-nonsubmodule.sh
>> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
>> +#!/bin/sh
>> +
>> +test_description='test git ls-files --others with non-submodule
>> repositories'
>> +
>> +. ./test-lib.sh
>> +
>> +test_expect_success 'setup: expected output' '
>> + cat >expected <<-EOF
>> + expected
>> + output
>> + EOF
>> +'
>
> I think this is overkill. Usually we have one expectation for a
> single test, so having the above inside the actual test below makes
> more sense.
OK, I'll move this into the test.
