Re: [PATCH 0/7] Improve git-pull test coverage
- From
Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 5, 2015, 10:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CACRoPnSJdMmJNQ4xrKr5Og6rZOjCm4Ad8rv5dVfTZod6d5pKWg@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqlhh4tfd0.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
Hi Junio,
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> I didn't like the grepping of error messages alone as a way to > diagnose the failure, though. When we expect the pull to fail > without touching anything in the working tree, I'd prefer to see > that tested explicitly (e.g. "if pull mistakenly tried to go ahead > and touch this file that would be involved in the merge, its > contents would change---let's make sure that does not happen by > making sure the contents before and after are the same" kind of > thing).
Yes, you're right. Some tests do need these additional checks. Will add them in the re-roll.
Just to be sure, aside from checking that git-pull does not touch files it should not touch in the event of an error, I do believe we also need to check its error message, as printing out the correct user-friendly error messages is one of the features of git-pull.
Regards, Paul