Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] shortlog: Test reading a log from a SHA256 repo in a non-git directory

From: Wolfgang Müller <wolf@oriole.systems>
Date: Oct 16, 2024, 19:35 UTC
Message-ID: <jpbyxh7o3kip6mef7ie545futmfer2o4qjryvq7yta7qvsqj6f@4zsqyn7t7hnf>
In-Reply-To: <ZxATKIRGv4QCM9Td@nand.local>

On 2024-10-16 15:25, Taylor Blau wrote:

> Same note here about ordering Signed-off-by: and Thanks-to: lines as in
> the previous patch.

Shall keep in mind, thanks!

Show 16 quoted lines

> > @@ -147,6 +147,14 @@ fuzz()
> >  	echo | nongit git shortlog --author=author
> >  '
> >
> > +test_expect_success 'shortlog from non-git directory reads log from SHA256 repository' '
> > +	test_when_finished "rm -rf repo" &&
> > +	git init --object-format=sha256 repo &&
> 
> I wondered why we needed a separate repo for this test, but I understand
> now that we need to have a SHA-256 repository to test this on.
> 
> I'm still dubious as to the value of this test overall, but I think it
> may be nice to s/repo/sha256-repo/ or something here to indicate its
> purpose more clearly in the test itself.
> 
> I don't feel strongly about it, though.

I personally lean towards skipping out on this test, but I can also see value in it coming from a point of view of future changes to git-shortlog(1) behaviour. Then again, perhaps it would be better then to add a relevant test only if new behaviour is added. No strong feelings here either, I'd defer to what regular maintainers and developers here prefer :-)

-- 
Wolf