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
