Re: [PATCH 3/3] Tests file for git-remote-mediawiki
- From
Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
- Date
- Jun 8, 2012, 09:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <vpqy5nyyxuh.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
- In-Reply-To
- <CA+hdvHhPf-p0N36fXH6Spd-svQ2i1sU7Wc9g7T17Gh8dnA2T6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Simon Perrat <simon.perrat@ensimag.imag.fr> writes:
Show 12 quoted lines
> 2012/6/8 Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> >> >> "Simon.Cathebras" <Simon.Cathebras@ensimag.imag.fr> writes: >> > Do you mean that we should split the third patch into two patches ? >> > For instance:: >> > Patch 3/4: tests for git pull >> > Patch 4/4: tests for git push >> >> Yes, except the title should mention git-remote-mediawiki, of course. >> > > Should we split our test file in two then ? Currently they're all in t9361.
The patch I was commenting does
t/t9360-git-mediawiki.sh | 265 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ t/t9361-git-mediawiki.sh | 213 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(BTW, you can find a better naming for the files, if one tests clone, then clone should appear in the title, same for push/pull).
There's nothing wrong with touching several files in the same commit, but when your commit messages looks like
- first file: does this - second file: does that
and there's no dependencies, it's usually better to split the commit.
-- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/