From: Eric Sunshine Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 21:16:06 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] t/t5520: test --[no-]autostash with pull.rebase=true Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1459258200-32444-6-git-send-email-mehul.jain2029@gmail.com> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Mehul Jain wrote: > "--[no-]autostash" option for git-pull is only valid in rebase mode. > That is, either --rebase is used or pull.rebase=true. Existing tests > already check the cases when --rebase is used but fails to check for > pull.rebase=true case. > > Add two new tests to check that --[no-]autostash option works with > pull.rebase=true. > > Signed-off-by: Mehul Jain > --- > diff --git a/t/t5520-pull.sh b/t/t5520-pull.sh > @@ -316,6 +316,26 @@ test_expect_success 'pull.rebase' ' > +test_expect_success 'pull --autostash & pull.rebase=true' ' > + test_config pull.rebase true && > + git reset --hard before-rebase && > + echo dirty >new_file && > + git add new_file && > + git pull --autostash . copy && > + test_cmp_rev HEAD^ copy && > + test "$(cat new_file)" = dirty && > + test "$(cat file)" = "modified again" > +' With the exception of the missing --rebase argument, this is exactly the same code as in test_rebase_autostash(), right? Rather than repeating this code yet again, it might be nice to augment that function to accept a (possibly) optional argument controlling whether --rebase is used. > + > +test_expect_success 'pull --no-autostash & pull.rebase=true' ' > + test_config pull.rebase true && > + git reset --hard before-rebase && > + echo dirty >new_file && > + git add new_file && > + test_must_fail git pull --no-autostash . copy 2>err && > + test_i18ngrep "Cannot pull with rebase: Your index contains uncommitted changes." err > +' Ditto with regard to test_rebase_no_autostash() (or test_rebase_autostash_fail() as I suggested in my patch 4/5 review).