Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> "git fetch" was being used with contrived refspecs to create tags and
> remote-tracking branches in test repositories in preparation for the
> actual tests. This is obscure and also makes one wonder whether this
> is indeed just preparation or whether some side-effect of "git fetch"
> is being tested.
> So use the more straightforward commands "git tag" / "git update-ref"
> when preparing branches in test repositories.
> Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu>
> t/t5510-fetch.sh | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
> index c5e5dfc..08d8dbb 100755
> --- a/t/t5510-fetch.sh
> +++ b/t/t5510-fetch.sh
> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ test_expect_success 'fetch --prune on its own works as
> expected' '
> cd "$D" &&
> git clone . prune &&
> cd prune &&
> - git fetch origin refs/heads/master:refs/remotes/origin/extrabranch &&
> + git update-ref refs/remotes/origin/extrabranch master &&
As long as you have checked that our local 'master' should be at the
same commit as the origin's 'master' at this point, I think this
change is OK.
I wouldn't call the use of "very explicit, without any room for
mistake" refspecs "contrived", though.
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