On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 03:23:18PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:
> How about squashing in this test?
> t/t4300-merge-tree.sh | 13 +++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> diff --git a/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh b/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh
> index bd43b3d..2defb42 100755
> --- a/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh
> +++ b/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh
> @@ -205,6 +205,19 @@ EXPECTED
> test_cmp expected actual
> +test_expect_success 'file remove A, B (same)' '
> + cat >expected <<\EXPECTED &&
> + git reset --hard initial &&
> + test_commit "rm-a-b-base" "ONE" "AAA" &&
> + git rm ONE &&
> + git commit -m "rm-a-b" &&
> + git tag "rm-a-b" &&
> + git merge-tree rm-a-b-base rm-a-b rm-a-b >actual &&
I'm not sure about using the same "our" and "their" refs here. The
existing tests go out of their way to create separate commits - although
since they contain identical trees I don't think that actually buys us
Since this test does fail without my patch, it clearly does trigger the
affected code, so I think it's fine as is.
> + test_cmp expected actual
> test_expect_success 'file change A, remove B' '
> cat >expected <<\EXPECTED &&
> removed in remote
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