Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] git-cherry-pick: Add test to validate new options
- From
Clemens Buchacher <drizzd@aon.at>
- Date
- Apr 17, 2012, 21:38 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20120417213851.GA20082@ecki>
- In-Reply-To
- <20120417105604.GB11462@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 06:56:04AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 11:42:49PM +0200, Clemens Buchacher wrote: > > > > It seems that I was implying a lot more than I realized. What I meant > > was that master and empty-branch2 are equivalent for the purposes of > > that test (empty-branch2^ also is a non-empty commit [*1*]), but while > > master is a moving target, empty-branch2 is untouched. > > > for the purposes of the --keep-redundant-commits however, the target is > irrelevant. The only requirement is that we cherry-pick a commit that is > guaranteed to become empty when applied.
That we agree on.
> We certainly could do that on empty branch2, but theres no advantage > to doing so,
The advantage is that I do not have to read the other tests in order to understand what this test does, because contrary to the master branch, they do not modify empty-branch2.
> and given that every other test attempts to cherry-pick to master, I > rather like the consistency.
We could also consistently not use the master branch.
Show 5 quoted lines
> > However, I just notice that empty-branch2 is also the root commit, so > > maybe this will not work after all. But that should be easy to fix. > > It is easy to fix, given your clarified description above, its just that IMO, > its not broken.
Well, I don't mind too badly if this doesn't go may way. But I hope that I managed at least to explain my point.