Junio C Hamano wrote:
> diff --git a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
> index a58406d..c175ef1 100755
> --- a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
> +++ b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
> @@ -934,6 +934,21 @@ test_expect_success 'rebase --edit-todo can be used to 
> modify todo' '
>         test L = $(git cat-file commit HEAD | sed -ne \$p)
>  '
> +test_expect_success 'rebase -i produces readable reflog' '

I don't know if this test is a good idea at all.  We never directly
check the messages written by a command to the reflog, and I suspect
that there is a good reason for this: the format of .git/logs is not
guaranteed to be stable, and the messages written by various commands
are not guaranteed to be stable either; the only machine-parsing of
reflogs we do is very minimal: interpret_nth_prior_checkout() and

A quick

  $ git grep .git/logs -- t

shows that I'm mostly right about this.

Why make an exception in the case of rebase -i?  In the worst case,
the patch atleast needs to be discussed as an independent patch: it's
certainly not obvious enough to sneak into this series.  I'll submit a
re-roll without this hunk.
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

Reply via email to