Re: [PATCH 2/2] apply: rewrite unit tests with structured cases

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Feb 19, 2024, 21:49 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqcyss5dm3.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <7dab12ab7b8af3e6a0778fc1a01dd1479990bcff.1708317938.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

"Philip Peterson via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> From: Philip Peterson <philip.c.peterson@gmail.com>
>
> The imperative format was a little hard to read, so I rewrote the test cases
> in a declarative style by defining a common structure for each test case and
> its assertions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philip Peterson <philip.c.peterson@gmail.com>
> ---
>  t/unit-tests/t-apply.c | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  1 file changed, 78 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)

In this project, we do not add a version of a known-to-be-bad file in patch [1/2], only to be immediately improved in patch [2/2]. Unless, of course, there is a good reason to do so. And "to preserve the true history of what happened in the developer's working tree" is not a good reason.

We give our developers "rebase -i" and other means to rewrite their Git history, not just because we want them to be able to pretend that they are a better developer who never make such a mistake or misdesign in the first place, but because a polished history is easier to review in the shorter term and to maintain in the longer term.

Thanks.