Re: [PATCH 3/6] t5516 (fetch-push): introduce mk_test_with_name()
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Mar 22, 2013, 14:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20130322145936.GD3083@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vmwtv8p1c.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:52:47AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > > > I think this is OK, and I do not mind if it gets applied. But what I was > > hinting at in my earlier mail was that we might want to do this (I have > > it as a separate patch on top of your 3/6 here, but it would make more > > sense squashed in): > > I would prefer to see a preparatory patch to teach mk_test/mk_empty > to _always_ take the new name (i.e. the result of your patch) and > then do whatever new things on top.
I think that is what my patch does (it is meant to come at the point of 3/6, and then the rest would need to be rebased to just use "mk_test" instead of "mk_test_with_name").
> By the way, I am planning to _not_ look at new stuff today. I'd > rather see known recent regressions addressed (and unknown ones > discovered and squashed) before we move forward, and I would > appreciate if regular contributors did the same.
Yeah, I have several to look at (the "subdir/" in gitattributes is the biggest one, I think).
-Peff