From: Junio C Hamano Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 09:46:08 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3404: extra checks and s/! git/test_must_fail git/ Message-ID: <7v4p7nazof.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20080621014636.GG7369@leksak.fem-net> Stephan Beyer writes: >> > Perhaps I'm not consequent, but I thought that it's not worth it ;-) >> >> Doesn't that logic make the other s/!/test_must_fail/ changes >> also not worth it? What is the reason behind the change? > > The s/!/test_must_fail/ is just an "extra" like > "Hey, you're currently standing, can you bring me some tea?" Counting the places that were affected, I would not call which one is primary change and which one is extra. The later half of your patch is all about test_must_fail isn't it? I am all for making tests more careful, and I think more use of test_must_fail makes quite a lot of sense. Please don't do a half-ass job if you are doing the conversion anyway. About the commit log message, I tend to agree that your original subject looked ugly and it would have been nicer to just say "t3404: more strict tests for git-rebase" or something like that, but probably an empty commit message body would have been Ok.