Cleanup rebase signoff tests #1713
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Perform the setup in a dedicated test so the later tests can be run independently. Also avoid running git upstream of a pipe and take advantage of test_commit. Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
Using a helper function makes the tests shorter and avoids running "git cat-file" upstream of a pipe. Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
|
/submit |
|
Submitted as [email protected] To fetch this version into To fetch this version to local tag |
![gitgitgadget[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/12836?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
|
||
| git config alias.rbs "rebase --signoff" | ||
| ' | ||
|
|
||
| # We configure an alias to do the rebase --signoff so that | ||
| # on the next subtest we can show that --no-signoff overrides the alias |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):
"Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
> From: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
>
> Using a helper function makes the tests shorter and avoids running "git
> cat-file" upstream of a pipe.
Nice.
|
|
||
| git config alias.rbs "rebase --signoff" | ||
| ' | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):
"Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
> From: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
>
> This test file assumes the "apply" backend is the default which is not
> the case since 2ac0d6273f (rebase: change the default backend from "am"
> to "merge", 2020-02-15). Make sure the "apply" backend is tested by
> specifying it explicitly.
Hmph, doesn't this lose coverage for the merge backend, though?
> Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
> ---
> t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh b/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh
> index 133e54114f6..1bebd1ce74a 100755
> --- a/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh
> +++ b/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh
> @@ -38,8 +38,8 @@ test_expect_success 'setup' '
>
> # We configure an alias to do the rebase --signoff so that
> # on the next subtest we can show that --no-signoff overrides the alias
> -test_expect_success 'rebase --signoff adds a sign-off line' '
> - git rbs HEAD^ &&
> +test_expect_success 'rebase --apply --signoff adds a sign-off line' '
> + git rbs --apply HEAD^ &&
> test_commit_message HEAD expected-signed
> 'There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, [email protected] wrote (reply to this):
Hi Junio
On 10/04/2024 00:08, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:
> >> From: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
>>
>> This test file assumes the "apply" backend is the default which is not
>> the case since 2ac0d6273f (rebase: change the default backend from "am"
>> to "merge", 2020-02-15). Make sure the "apply" backend is tested by
>> specifying it explicitly.
> > Hmph, doesn't this lose coverage for the merge backend, though?
I don't think so, we had coverage for the merge backend from the other tests before 2ac0d6273f as all of the other tests in this file use the merge backend. We're no longer testing "--signoff" without specifying some other option that selects a backend but it seems unlikely that we could break that without breaking one of the other tests.
Best Wishes
Phillip
> >> Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh b/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh
>> index 133e54114f6..1bebd1ce74a 100755
>> --- a/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh
>> +++ b/t/t3428-rebase-signoff.sh
>> @@ -38,8 +38,8 @@ test_expect_success 'setup' '
>> >> # We configure an alias to do the rebase --signoff so that
>> # on the next subtest we can show that --no-signoff overrides the alias
>> -test_expect_success 'rebase --signoff adds a sign-off line' '
>> - git rbs HEAD^ &&
>> +test_expect_success 'rebase --apply --signoff adds a sign-off line' '
>> + git rbs --apply HEAD^ &&
>> test_commit_message HEAD expected-signed
>> 'There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):
[email protected] writes:
>> Hmph, doesn't this lose coverage for the merge backend, though?
>
> I don't think so, we had coverage for the merge backend from the other
> tests before 2ac0d6273f as all of the other tests in this file use the
> merge backend. We're no longer testing "--signoff" without specifying
> some other option that selects a backend but it seems unlikely that we
> could break that without breaking one of the other tests.
OK, so we have "rebase --merge --signoff" tested elsewhere and we
are replacing "rebase --signoff" with "rebase --apply --signoff"?
Thanks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, [email protected] wrote (reply to this):
On 10/04/2024 15:22, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> [email protected] writes:
> >>> Hmph, doesn't this lose coverage for the merge backend, though?
>>
>> I don't think so, we had coverage for the merge backend from the other
>> tests before 2ac0d6273f as all of the other tests in this file use the
>> merge backend. We're no longer testing "--signoff" without specifying
>> some other option that selects a backend but it seems unlikely that we
>> could break that without breaking one of the other tests.
> > OK, so we have "rebase --merge --signoff" tested elsewhere and we
> are replacing "rebase --signoff" with "rebase --apply --signoff"?
Exactly
> Thanks.
> There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):
[email protected] writes:
> On 10/04/2024 15:22, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> [email protected] writes:
>>
>>>> Hmph, doesn't this lose coverage for the merge backend, though?
>>>
>>> I don't think so, we had coverage for the merge backend from the other
>>> tests before 2ac0d6273f as all of the other tests in this file use the
>>> merge backend. We're no longer testing "--signoff" without specifying
>>> some other option that selects a backend but it seems unlikely that we
>>> could break that without breaking one of the other tests.
>> OK, so we have "rebase --merge --signoff" tested elsewhere and we
>> are replacing "rebase --signoff" with "rebase --apply --signoff"?
>
> Exactly
Perhaps we can write that in the log message to help the next person
who reads the patch? Something like...
t3428: restore coverage for "apply" backend
This test file assumes the "apply" backend is the default which is
not the case since 2ac0d6273f (rebase: change the default backend
from "am" to "merge", 2020-02-15). The way "merge" backend honors
"--signoff" is already tested elsewhere, so make sure the "apply"
backend is tested by specifying it explicitly.
Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>There was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, [email protected] wrote (reply to this):
On 10/04/2024 17:45, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> [email protected] writes:
> >> On 10/04/2024 15:22, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> [email protected] writes:
>>>
>>>>> Hmph, doesn't this lose coverage for the merge backend, though?
>>>>
>>>> I don't think so, we had coverage for the merge backend from the other
>>>> tests before 2ac0d6273f as all of the other tests in this file use the
>>>> merge backend. We're no longer testing "--signoff" without specifying
>>>> some other option that selects a backend but it seems unlikely that we
>>>> could break that without breaking one of the other tests.
>>> OK, so we have "rebase --merge --signoff" tested elsewhere and we
>>> are replacing "rebase --signoff" with "rebase --apply --signoff"?
>>
>> Exactly
> > Perhaps we can write that in the log message to help the next person
> who reads the patch? Something like...
> > t3428: restore coverage for "apply" backend
> > This test file assumes the "apply" backend is the default which is
> not the case since 2ac0d6273f (rebase: change the default backend
> from "am" to "merge", 2020-02-15). The way "merge" backend honors
> "--signoff" is already tested elsewhere, so make sure the "apply"
> backend is tested by specifying it explicitly.
> > Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>
Sounds good, I'll send a re-roll
Thanks
PhillipThere was a problem hiding this comment.
On the Git mailing list, Phillip Wood wrote (reply to this):
On 12/04/2024 10:33, [email protected] wrote:
> On 10/04/2024 17:45, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> [email protected] writes:
>> Perhaps we can write that in the log message to help the next person
>> who reads the patch? Something like...
>>
>> t3428: restore coverage for "apply" backend
>> This test file assumes the "apply" backend is the default which is
>> not the case since 2ac0d6273f (rebase: change the default backend
>> from "am" to "merge", 2020-02-15). The way "merge" backend honors
>> "--signoff" is already tested elsewhere, so make sure the "apply"
>> backend is tested by specifying it explicitly.
>> Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>
> > Sounds good, I'll send a re-roll
Oh, it looks like this hit next yesterday
Phillip
|
This branch is now known as |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@b9d7312. |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@f35b092. |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@f4c219c. |
|
This patch series was integrated into next via git@3c40516. |
This test file assumes the "apply" backend is the default which is not the case since 2ac0d62 (rebase: change the default backend from "am" to "merge", 2020-02-15). The way "merge" backend honors "--signoff" is already tested elsewhere, so make sure the "apply" backend is tested by specifying it explicitly. Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <[email protected]>
phillipwood
force-pushed
the
cleanup-rebase-signoff-tests
branch
from
b45af37 to
7d796c7
Compare
|
User |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@97b69ff. |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@dfb36b3. |
|
There was a status update in the "New Topics" section about the branch Test cleanup. Will merge to 'master'. source: <[email protected]> |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@26b5e59. |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@a7c9e28. |
|
This patch series was integrated into seen via git@93e3f9d. |
|
This patch series was integrated into master via git@93e3f9d. |
|
This patch series was integrated into next via git@93e3f9d. |
|
Closed via 93e3f9d. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This series cleans up the tests for "git rebase --signoff" in preparation for extending them and fixing a couple of bugs in a future series. The cleanups are:
cc: Phillip Wood [email protected]