From: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 22:09:29 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] rebase: refuse to switch to a branch already checked out elsewhere (test)
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:
> 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().

> > 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