Re: GSoC 2016: Microproject

From: Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 19, 2016, 17:39 UTC
Message-ID: <CA+DCAeQLJnvNFdSobDNOGVaHbDRnRy4vm9_4SB+Bw+5N5QMKHA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <vpq37so26oz.fsf@anie.imag.fr>

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Hi,
>
> This is a double-post. You've posted almost the same message under the
> title "GSoC 2016". Nothing serious, but attention to details is
> important if you want to give a good image of yourself.

I'm sorry of this kind of behavior. It was due to a misunderstanding by my side.

Show 8 quoted lines

> I don't have all the code in mind, but I think it is. In this situation,
> you always end up with a variable telling Git what to do (I guess,
> autostash here), and this variable is set according to the configuration
> and the command-line.
>
> You should be careful about the precedence: command-line should override
> the configuration. And the default behavior should be used if neither
> the command-line nor the configuration specified otherwise.

Thanks for the suggestion. I've started the work on patch and did the change in the code which were necessary for Microproject. I have run the test by using "make", and there was no failure of any test. I've a doubt regarding tests. Here as "git pull" will now understand the argument that "--[no-]autostash" means "rebase.autostash" should be set false for current execution of command "git pull --rebase". So do I have to write a test for this new option?

Mehul Jain