Re: [PATCH 01/12] t3210: move to t0602

> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 04:40:10PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> "John Cai via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> From: John Cai <johncai86@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Move t3210 to t0602, since these tests are reffiles specific in that
>>> they modify loose refs manually. This is part of the effort to
>>> categorize these tests together based on the ref backend they test. When
>>> we upstream the reftable backend, we can add more tests to t06xx. This
>>> way, all tests that test specific ref backend behavior will be grouped
>>> together.
>>
>> So, ... is the idea to have (1) majority of ref tests, against which
>> all backends ought to behave the same way, will be written in
>> backend agnostic way (e.g., we have seen some patches to stop
>> touching the filesystem .git/refs/ hierarchy manually), and (2) some
>> backend specific tests will be grouped in a small number of test
>> script files for each backend and they all will use t6xx numbrs?
>>
>> OK.  Sounds like a good plan to me.
>
> Yes, that's the plan. The backend specific tests will be free to also
> exercise filesystem-level behaviour in order to pin down that things
> work as expected. But once their behaviour is nailed down all other
> generic tests should refrain from doing that to the best extent possible
> and instead use Git commands to do their thing.
>
>>> Signed-off-by: John Cai <johncai86@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>  t/{t3210-pack-refs.sh => t0602-reffiles-pack-refs.sh} | 0
>>>  1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>  rename t/{t3210-pack-refs.sh => t0602-reffiles-pack-refs.sh} (100%)
>
> Is there a reason why you picked t0602 instead of the not-yet-taken
> t0601? If it's only because I use t0601 in my reftable integration
> branch then I'd like us to pick t0601 here instead to avoid a weird gap.
> I'll adapt accordingly and rename the reftable tests to have a t061x
> prefix in that case so that they are nicely grouped together.