Re: [PATCH 2/3] branch: add --unset-upstream option

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@elego.de> writes:
>>
>>> diff --git a/t/t3200-branch.sh b/t/t3200-branch.sh
>>> index e9019ac..93e5d6e 100755
>>> --- a/t/t3200-branch.sh
>>> +++ b/t/t3200-branch.sh
>>> @@ -383,6 +383,22 @@ test_expect_success 'use --set-upstream-to modify a particular branch' \
>>>       test "$(git config branch.my13.remote)" = "." &&
>>>       test "$(git config branch.my13.merge)" = "refs/heads/master"'
>>>  
>>> +test_expect_success 'test --unset-upstream on HEAD' \
>>> +    'git branch my14
>>> +     test_config branch.master.remote foo &&
>>> +     test_config branch.master.merge foo &&
>>> +     git branch --set-upstream-to my14 &&
>>> +     git branch --unset-upstream &&
>>> +     test_must_fail git config branch.master.remote &&
>>> +     test_must_fail git config branch.master.merge'
>>> +
>>> +test_expect_success 'test --unset-upstream on a particular branch' \
>>> +    'git branch my15
>>> +     git branch --set-upstream-to master my14 &&
>>> +     git branch --unset-upstream my14 &&
>>> +     test_must_fail git config branch.my14.remote &&
>>> +     test_must_fail git config branch.my14.merge'
>>> +
>>
>> What should happen when you say "--unset-upstream" on a branch B
>> that does not have B@{upstream}?  Should it fail?  Should it be
>> silently ignored?  Is it undefined that we do not want to test?
>
> I'd say it should be ignored, as the end result we want is for there to
> be no upstream information. What we do underneath is remove a couple of
> config options, wich doesn't fail if they didn't insist in the first
> place.