Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3200-branch: test setting branch as own upstream

From: Brian Gesiak <modocache@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 28, 2014, 10:44 UTC
Message-ID: <CAN7MxmUUoz-HGFiTfgpvLpkXhvjBn_dYje7unoHE-Y=k3A0aqg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140228083718.GA11480@sigill.intra.peff.net>

> If you feel like continuing on this series, converting the warning()
> into a die() would be a much more productive use of time (but if you
> don't, I do not see any reason not to take the patches you've posted).

I'd be happy to keep working on this. In fact, I think I have a patch for this ready. But just to clarify:

Show 6 quoted lines

> I notice that the warning comes from install_branch_config, which gets
> used both for "branch -u", but also in the "side effect" case I
> mentioned above. Is it possible to trigger this as part of such a case?
> I think maybe "git branch -f --track foo foo" would do it. If so, we
> should perhaps include a test that it does not break if we upgrade the
> "-u" case to an error.

Do you mean that install_branch_config should continue to emit a warning in the "side effect" case? I'm not sure I agree--how is "git branch -f --track foo foo" less erroneous than "git branch -u foo refs/heads/foo"? Perhaps I'm missing some insight on how "--track" is used.

The tests appear to already cover all instances in which install_branch_config is called, and bumping the warning to an error does not cause any test failures.

- Brian Gesiak