On 8 June 2015 at 16:35, Peter Maydell <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8 June 2015 at 16:11, Catalin Marinas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Applied, with a minor update below:
>>
>> On 1 June 2015 at 17:30, Peter Maydell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> --- a/t/t3300-edit.sh
>>> +++ b/t/t3300-edit.sh
>>> @@ -177,6 +177,12 @@ test_expect_success 'Acknowledge a patch' '
>>>      test "$(msg HEAD^)" = "$m//Acked-by: C O Mitter 
>>> <[email protected]>"
>>>  '
>>>
>>> +test_expect_success 'Review a patch' '
>>> +    m=$(msg HEAD^) &&
>>> +    stg edit --review p1 &&
>>> +    test "$(msg HEAD^)" = "$m//Reviewed-by: C O Mitter 
>>> <[email protected]>"
>>> +'
>>
>> The test failed for me since Reviewed-by doesn't have two \n after Acked-by.
>>
>> diff --git a/t/t3300-edit.sh b/t/t3300-edit.sh
>> index f29fdf6db52b..42152ddc0ab9 100755
>> --- a/t/t3300-edit.sh
>> +++ b/t/t3300-edit.sh
>> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ test_expect_success 'Acknowledge a patch' '
>>  test_expect_success 'Review a patch' '
>>      m=$(msg HEAD^) &&
>>      stg edit --review p1 &&
>> -    test "$(msg HEAD^)" = "$m//Reviewed-by: C O Mitter 
>> <[email protected]>"
>> +    test "$(msg HEAD^)" = "$m/Reviewed-by: C O Mitter 
>> <[email protected]>"
>>  '
>>
>>  test_expect_success 'Set author' '
>
> Weird. I could have sworn the test suite passed for me, but retrying
> you're right. Thanks for applying the patch.

I didn't fully understand either: I swapped the Reviewed-by with the
Acked-by test in t3300-edit.sh and it passed with "//" in both cases.
But I didn't have time to investigate.

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
stgit-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/stgit-users

Reply via email to