From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 06:28:21 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] t4202 (log): add test for --follow over a merge
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?

[...]
> +	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