Caleb Thompson <ca...@calebthompson.io> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 07:41:29PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:42:26AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> > Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
>> > >  It might make sense for test_set_editor, when run from within a
>> > > test, to behave more like test_config, and do:
>> > >
>> > > test_when_finished '
>> > > sane_unset FAKE_EDITOR &&
>> > > sane_unset EDITOR
>> > > '
>> > >
>> > > I don't know if there would be fallouts with other test scripts,
>> > > though.
>> > The default environment for tests is to set EDITOR=: to avoid
>> > accidentally triggering interactive cruft and interfering with
>> > automated tests, I thought.
>> Ah, yeah, that would make more sense.
>> > If the above sane-unset is changed to EDITOR=: then I think that is
>> > probably sensible.
>> I think the trick is that other scripts may be relying on the global
>> side-effect, and would need to be fixed up (and it is not always obvious
>> which spots will need it; they might fail the tests, or they might start
>> silently passing for the wrong reason).
> For this reason, and that the scope of this change has already ballooned, I'd
> rather not make this change in this patch if that's alright.
> Caleb Thompson
My comment was not about your series, but "if we were to update
test_set_editor, unsetting EDITOR is not the right thing to do".
I do not think it is reasonable to include such a change to
test_set_editor in this series.
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