From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2021 20:50:05 GMT
Subject: Re: ab/fsck-unexpected-type (and "cat-file replace handling and optimization")
Message-ID: <xmqqily7jl6q.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <YV+sLmlWufC5ullA@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> In this case I think neither is churn. I needed to clean up the earlier
> part of the test script so that my later tests didn't break, and Ævar
> touched the same area to cover more cases in those tests.
> ...
> One other possible thing to do during the resolution is combine the
> cleanup of both objects in a single test (since in Ævar's series, both
> objects are created together).

That is what makes it a churn X-<.

More coverage does not have to be tied to turning a sequence of
tests into a loop, moving things around, etc.  Just adding more of
similar things wouldn't have caused such a clash with a possible
mismerge.

But I need to point out that it is recognised as a churn only when
there is an unfortunate topic that wants to touch the overlapping
area at the same time.  If there isn't, such a change would be seen
as a valuable preliminary clean-up ;-)

So, of course, it depends on luck.