From: Phillip Wood Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2026 13:57:16 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3507: pin CHERRY_PICK_HEAD absence for a conflicting --no-commit 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: > Phillip Wood 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