From: phillip.wood123@gmail.com Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:33:25 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] t3428: restore coverage for "apply" backend Message-ID: <33c6c944-e1f7-48e1-a9f2-8bd5027b7c61@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On 10/04/2024 17:45, Junio C Hamano wrote: > phillip.wood123@gmail.com writes: > >> On 10/04/2024 15:22, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> phillip.wood123@gmail.com writes: >>> >>>>> Hmph, doesn't this lose coverage for the merge backend, though? >>>> >>>> I don't think so, we had coverage for the merge backend from the other >>>> tests before 2ac0d6273f as all of the other tests in this file use the >>>> merge backend. We're no longer testing "--signoff" without specifying >>>> some other option that selects a backend but it seems unlikely that we >>>> could break that without breaking one of the other tests. >>> OK, so we have "rebase --merge --signoff" tested elsewhere and we >>> are replacing "rebase --signoff" with "rebase --apply --signoff"? >> >> Exactly > > Perhaps we can write that in the log message to help the next person > who reads the patch? Something like... > > t3428: restore coverage for "apply" backend > > This test file assumes the "apply" backend is the default which is > not the case since 2ac0d6273f (rebase: change the default backend > from "am" to "merge", 2020-02-15). The way "merge" backend honors > "--signoff" is already tested elsewhere, so make sure the "apply" > backend is tested by specifying it explicitly. > > Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano Sounds good, I'll send a re-roll Thanks Phillip