From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:46:13 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rebase tests: test linear branch topology
Message-ID: <xmqq7edrr79m.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190222145344.GA5090@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

>> While I'm at it add a --fork-point test, strictly speaking this is
>> redundant to the existing '' test, as no argument to rebase implies
>> --fork-point. But now it's easier to grep for tests that explicitly
>> stress --fork-point.
>
> That makes sense.
>
>> +test_expect_success 'setup branches and remote tracking' '
>> +	git tag -l >tags &&
>> +	for tag in $(cat tags)
>> +	do
>> +		git branch branch-$tag $tag || return 1
>> +	done &&
>
> I don't think we need this extra tmpfile and cat, do we? I.e.,
>
>   for tag in $(git tag -l)
>
> would work.

I think it is being (overly) defensive not to lose the exit status
of "git tag".

> We should probably avoid depending on the exact output of
> the porcelain "tag", though. Maybe:
>
>   git for-each-ref \
>     --format='create refs/heads/branch-%(refname:strip=2) %(objectname)' \
>     refs/tags |
>   git update-ref --stdin
>
> which has the added bonus of using a constant number of processes.

Much better ;-)