From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 07:22:27 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] t0000: drop "known breakage" test
Message-ID: <20131229072227.GB31788@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20131228205104.GA5544@google.com>

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:51:04PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

> Jeff King wrote:
> 
> > I am not _that_ bothered by the "known breakage", but AFAICT there is
> > zero benefit to keeping this redundant test.
> 
> Devil's advocate: it ensures that anyone wrapping git's tests (like
> the old smoketest infrastructure experiment) is able to handle an
> expected failure.

Thanks. One of the things I love about open source is that as soon as I
say "I can't see how...", the answer is crowd-sourced for me. :)

That being said, even if the test has a non-zero possible value...

> But in practice I don't mind the behavior before or after this patch.
> If the test harness is that broken, we'll know.  And people writing
> code that wraps git's tests can write their own custom sanity-checks.

...I think for these reasons that the value is smaller than the
disruption caused by the test, and the patch is a net win.

-Peff