From: Michael S. Tsirkin Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 12:53:29 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] send-email: add test for duplicate utf8 name Message-ID: <20130620125329.GA24236@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87vc597xtc.fsf@linux-k42r.v.cablecom.net> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 02:48:15PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 02:41:37PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: > >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > >> > >> > Verify that author name is not duplicated if it matches > >> > sender, even if it is in utf8. > >> > >> Small nit: if you make two patches out of it, add the tests first with > >> test_expect_failure. Then flip it to test_expect_success in the actual > >> code change. That makes it easy to verify that the test actually checks > >> the right thing, and that it was your code change that fixed it. > > > > I did this by reverting 1/2 and rerunning. > > > > But applying in reverse order means bisect can give us > > a setup where some tests fail, I thought it's a > > good idea to avoid that. > > That's why you need to test_expect_*failure* in the commit that adds the > tests -- essentially saying "I know this is broken!". > > Yes, it's a roundabout way. But splitting code and tests in the way you > just posted is equally roundabout, while not having the benefit that one > can check out the commit at patch 1 and verify that it is indeed broken > (showing up as "still have known breakage"). I'll try to do it like this next time, I hope for now Junio can take it as is. > -- > Thomas Rast > trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch