Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3507: pin CHERRY_PICK_HEAD absence for a conflicting --no-commit

From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 4, 2026, 13:57 UTC
Message-ID: <6d9595fc-6dc0-4bbc-b060-b34d782c6215@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20260904124507.12977-1-f@lex.la>

On 04/09/2026 13:45, Aleksei Sviridkin wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
>> What does pinning a test mean?
>> [...]
>> Using test_must_fail() here without checking the error message means
>> we don't verify the reason that the cherry-pick failed.
> 
> Dropped the test, so the wording goes with it. "pin" was jargon, sorry.
> 
> Your placement was the right one: the advice test is what tells us the
> pick stopped on a conflict, which the bare test_must_fail did not. But
> the clean-pick test at t3507:98 and the conflicting case share the
> !opts->no_commit guard, so the assertion had no coverage left to add.

I don't follow this at all - where is the existing check that CHERRY_PICK_HEAD does not exist when "git cherry-pick --no-commit" stops for conflicts? I was suggesting that we add a check for that to the test "advice from failed cherry-pick --no-commit", I'd forgotten when I wrote my earlier email that we have a helper function test_ref_missing() to do just that.

Thanks

Phillip