Re: [PATCH v2] rev-parse: respect core.hooksPath in --git-path

From: Remi Galan Alfonso <remi.galan-alfonso@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr>
Date: Aug 17, 2016, 08:43 UTC
Message-ID: <594839500.1229861.1471423409171.JavaMail.zimbra@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq4m6kcvc6.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 38 quoted lines

> Remi Galan Alfonso <remi.galan-alfonso@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr>
> writes:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>>> Hi Rémi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, Remi Galan Alfonso wrote:
>>>
>>> > Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>>> > > diff --git a/t/t1350-config-hooks-path.sh b/t/t1350-config-hooks-path.sh
>>> > > index 5e3fb3a..f1f9aee 100755
>>> > > --- a/t/t1350-config-hooks-path.sh
>>> > > +++ b/t/t1350-config-hooks-path.sh
>>> > > @@ -34,4 +34,10 @@ test_expect_success 'Check that various forms of specifying core.hooksPath work'
>>> > >          test_cmp expect actual
>>> > >  '
>>> > >  
>>> > > +test_expect_success 'git rev-parse --git-path hooks' '
>>> > > +        git config core.hooksPath .git/custom-hooks &&
>>> >
>>> > Any reason to not use 'test_config' here?
>>>
>>> Yes: consistency. The rest of the script uses `git config`, not
>>> `test_config`.
>>
>> Fine by me, then. Sorry for the noise.
>
> No, thanks for reviewing.  I'll take Dscho's patch as-is but once it
> hits 'next', it probably is a good idea to do a separate clean-up
> patch on top to use test_config where necessary.
>
> Having said that, this entire script is about constantly changing
> the value of that single configuration variable and see how the code
> performs, so any new test added after existing ones is expected to
> ignore left-over values in the variable and set it to a value of its
> own liking.  So I suspect there is no existing "git config" call in
> this script, with or without Dscho's patch, that would benefit from
> getting converted to test_config.

Thanks for checking the ones in this file, considering the lack of benefits it might not be worth it to change it for now.

I tried to see if the `git config` in other tests were in the same case or not but the sheer amount made me reconsider. However taking a look at a couple of random ones, there are some scripts that would benefit from the conversion. For example in t3200-branch there is:

    test_expect_success 'git branch with column.*' '
    	git config column.ui column &&
    	git config column.branch "dense" &&
    	COLUMNS=80 git branch >actual &&
    	git config --unset column.branch &&
    	git config --unset column.ui &&
    	cat >expected <<\EOF &&
      a/b/c   bam   foo   l   * master    n     o/p   r
      abc     bar   j/k   m/m   master2   o/o   q
    EOF
    	test_cmp expected actual
    '

The conversion would drop 2 lines in this particular case and would avoid bleeding the config should `git branch` fail (not sure how possible that is...).

(I can make a patch for t3200 but that won't be before days/weeks, so if someone else wants to take care of it I won't mind)

If I have some time to kill, I'll try looking at a few others but I won't expect that any time soon.

Thanks, Rémi