Re: [PATCH] t3701: two subtests are fixed

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 21, 2022, 15:45 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq8rpqja0v.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2206181342200.349@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

>> in config.mak. Nothing else strikes me as potentially relevant.
>>
>> Ævar noticed this and has a better version of my patch, I think.
>
> So you did not find it utterly rude and presumptuous that somebody sent a
> new iteration of your patch without even so much as consulting with you
> whether you're okay with this? I salute your forbearance, then.

I had an impression that these (wasn't there another one) were independent discoveries and patching that happened at the same time.

Show 19 quoted lines

> Besides, it is not really a better version of your patch. That would have
> been:
>
> -- snip --
> diff --git a/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh b/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh
> index 94537a6b40a..6d1032fe8ae 100755
> --- a/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh
> +++ b/t/t3701-add-interactive.sh
> @@ -538,7 +538,9 @@ test_expect_success 'split hunk "add -p (edit)"' '
>  	! grep "^+15" actual
>  '
>
> -test_expect_failure 'split hunk "add -p (no, yes, edit)"' '
> +test_lazy_prereq BUILTIN_ADD_I 'test_bool_env GIT_TEST_ADD_I_USE_BUILTIN true'
> +
> +test_expect_success BUILTIN_ADD_I 'split hunk "add -p (no, yes, edit)"' '
>  	test_write_lines 5 10 20 21 30 31 40 50 60 >test &&
>  	git reset &&
>  	# test sequence is s(plit), n(o), y(es), e(dit)

Prerequisite lets you skip.

This stops saying that "with scripted version 'add -p' does not behave in the way we want to see, and we want to leave us a mental note about it". I do not know if that is what we want.

Once scripted version gets fully retired, it of course stops mattering ;-)

Show 6 quoted lines

> @@ -562,7 +564,7 @@ test_expect_success 'split hunk with incomplete line at end' '
>  	test_must_fail git grep --cached before
>  '
>
> -test_expect_failure 'edit, adding lines to the first hunk' '
> +test_expect_failure BUILTIN_ADD_I 'edit, adding lines to the first hunk' '

I am not sure if this is a good change, quite honestly. With s/failure/success/, perhaps, but not in the posted form.