Re: [PATCH 3/3] t7004, t7030: fix here-doc syntax errors

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 23, 2017, 22:00 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqfui3ac2f.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170322225108.wub4bmr63hk2sp33@LykOS.localdomain>

Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu> writes:

> This sounds like a helpful addition to implement. We could update/add
> tests for compliance on this once the feature is addded and fix the
> ambiguous behavior in the tests now.

OK, so has everybody agreed what the next step would be? Is the patch below a good first step (I still need to get it signed off)?

-- >8 --
Subject: t7004, t7030: fix here-doc syntax errors
From: Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu>

Jan Palus noticed that some here-doc are spelled incorrectly, resulting the entire remainder of the test as if it were data slurped into the "expect" file, e.g. in this sequence

	cat >expect <<EOF &&
	... expectation ...
	EOF
	git $cmd_being_tested >actual &&
	test_cmp expect actual

the last command of the test is "cat" that sends everything to 'expect' and succeeds.

Fixing these issues in t7004 and t7030 reveals that "git tag -v" and "git verify-tag" with their --format option do not work as the test was expecting originally. Instead of showing both valid tags and tags with incorrect signatures on their output, tags that do not pass verification are omitted from the output.

Arguably, that is a safer behaviour, and because the format specifiers like %(tag) do not have a way to show if the signature verifies correctly, the command with the --format option cannot be used to get a list of tags annotated with their signature validity anyway.

For now, let's fix the here-doc syntax and update the expectation to match the reality. Maybe later when we extend the --format language available to "git tag -v" and "git verify-tag" to include things like "%(gpg:status)", we may want to change the behaviour so that piping a list of tag names into

    xargs git verify-tag --format='%(gpg:status) %(tag)'

becomes a good way to produce such a list, but that is a separate topic.

Noticed-by: Jan Palus <jan.palus@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
---
 t/t7004-tag.sh        | 10 ++++------
 t/t7030-verify-tag.sh | 10 ++++------
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/t/t7004-tag.sh b/t/t7004-tag.sh
index b4698ab5f5..0581053a06 100755
--- a/t/t7004-tag.sh
+++ b/t/t7004-tag.sh
@@ -896,17 +896,15 @@ test_expect_success GPG 'verifying a forged tag should fail' '
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'verifying a proper tag with --format pass and format accordingly' '
-	cat >expect <<-\EOF
+	cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
 	tagname : signed-tag
-	EOF &&
+	EOF
 	git tag -v --format="tagname : %(tag)" "signed-tag" >actual &&
 	test_cmp expect actual
 '
 
-test_expect_success 'verifying a forged tag with --format fail and format accordingly' '
-	cat >expect <<-\EOF
-	tagname : forged-tag
-	EOF &&
+test_expect_success 'verifying a forged tag with --format should fail silently' '
+	>expect &&
 	test_must_fail git tag -v --format="tagname : %(tag)" "forged-tag" >actual &&
 	test_cmp expect actual
 '
diff --git a/t/t7030-verify-tag.sh b/t/t7030-verify-tag.sh
index d62ccbb98e..79864a3411 100755
--- a/t/t7030-verify-tag.sh
+++ b/t/t7030-verify-tag.sh
@@ -126,17 +126,15 @@ test_expect_success GPG 'verify multiple tags' '
 '
 
 test_expect_success 'verifying tag with --format' '
-	cat >expect <<-\EOF
+	cat >expect <<-\EOF &&
 	tagname : fourth-signed
-	EOF &&
+	EOF
 	git verify-tag --format="tagname : %(tag)" "fourth-signed" >actual &&
 	test_cmp expect actual
 '
 
-test_expect_success 'verifying a forged tag with --format fail and format accordingly' '
-	cat >expect <<-\EOF
-	tagname : 7th forged-signed
-	EOF &&
+test_expect_success 'verifying a forged tag with --format should fail silently' '
+	>expect &&
 	test_must_fail git verify-tag --format="tagname : %(tag)" $(cat forged1.tag) >actual-forged &&
 	test_cmp expect actual-forged
 '