Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] remote: use remote_is_configured() for add and rename

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 15, 2016, 23:09 UTC
Message-ID: <20160215230920.GC30631@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cTH+S67_T=O58E_x--ZhawQEZKjCmK8G+unzm_8f2w8eA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 05:52:14PM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> > diff --git a/t/t5505-remote.sh b/t/t5505-remote.sh
> > @@ -157,6 +157,24 @@ test_expect_success 'rename errors out early when deleting non-existent branch'
> > +test_expect_success 'add existing foreign_vcs remote' '
> > +       git config --add remote.foo.vcs "bar" &&
> > +       git config --add remote.bar.vcs "bar" &&
> > +       test_when_finished git remote rm foo &&
> > +       test_when_finished git remote rm bar &&
> 
> Nit: If the second git-config fails, then none of the cleanup will
> happen. You'd either want to re-order them like this:
> 
>     git config --add remote.foo.vcs "bar" &&
>     test_when_finished git remote rm foo &&
>     git config --add remote.bar.vcs "bar" &&
>     test_when_finished git remote rm bar &&

Good catch. Do we actually care about "--add" here at all? We do not expect these remotes to have any existing config, I think. So would:

  test_config remote.foo.vcs bar &&
  test_config remote.bar.vcs bar

do? I guess technically the failing "git remote rename" could introduce extra config that is not cleaned up by those invocations, and we need to "git remote rm" to get a clean slate, but I don't think that is the case now (and it does not seem likely to become so in the future).

-Peff