Re: [PATCH] t4202 (log): add test for --follow over a merge
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- Apr 23, 2013, 06:28 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20130423062821.GA32683@elie.Belkin>
- In-Reply-To
- <1366643912-3942-1-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com>
Hi,
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> The --follow feature can be used to follow the history of a file over > a merge commit, and is useful even when the file hasn't been > copied/renamed. Add a test to show off this feature.
I can't claim to have followed the discussion, but I don't understand the above. If the file's name hasn't changed, the most one can hope for is that --follow doesn't hurt, no?
[...]
Show 8 quoted lines
> + cat >expect <<-\EOF && > + df26551 add a line to the beginning of ichi > + 882d8d9 add a line to the end of ichi > + 2fbe8c0 third > + f7dab8e second > + 3a2fdcb initial > + EOF > + test_cmp expect actual
t/README explains:
| As with any programming projects, existing programs are the best | source of the information. However, do _not_ emulate | t0000-basic.sh when writing your tests. The test is special in | that it tries to validate the very core of GIT. [...] | other tests that simply rely on basic parts of the core | GIT working properly should not have that level of intimate | knowledge of the core GIT internals. If all the test scripts | hardcoded the object IDs like t0000-basic.sh does, that defeats | the purpose of t0000-basic.sh, which is to isolate that level of | validation in one place.
Hard-coding object names makes it painful to tweak a given test and tests that come before it, lest a timestamp or the phase of moon change and cause the object names to drift. Don't do it, except in t0000.
Hope that helps, Jonathan