Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] rebase: refuse to switch to a branch already checked out elsewhere (test)
- From
Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 8, 2023, 22:09 UTC
- Message-ID
- <c1b3dc07-f3d3-273e-6486-9aa709b1c269@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqk00svimy.fsf@gitster.g>
On 07-feb-2023 21:19:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com> writes: > > > ... If the tests fail, I think it will be easier and > > less confusing to reach the original commit where the implementation was > > done if we keep them separated, rather than combining all three commits. > > No, if the test were in the same commit as the implementation, then > upon a future test breakage it is easier to see what code the test > was meant to protect, exactly because it is part of the same commit.
Yes, but my reasoning was that those tests protect what we did in 8d9fdd7 (worktree.c: check whether branch is rebased in another worktree, 2016-04-22) and in b5cabb4a9 (rebase: refuse to switch to branch already checked out elsewhere, 2020-02-23), not die_if_checked_out().
Show 5 quoted lines
> > I'm going to reorder the commits and change to use test_expect_failure(). > > Do not do that. Adding a failing test and flipping the > expect_failure to expect_success is a sure way to make the series > harder to review.
Hmm