Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] git-p4: update locked test case
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Apr 3, 2015, 21:55 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqk2xsg9lp.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAPig+cSsPZZ=kEQ9jwj-BKkO+gKFwZYVi-FrTvvTZpmatmokAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Luke Diamand <luke@diamand.org> wrote: >> The add-new-file and copy-existing-file tests from >> t9816-git-p4-locked.sh now pass. Update the test >> case accordingly. > > This patch should be folded into patch 3/4, shouldn't it?
If the fix and tests were done by the same person, we strongly prefer to see the code fix and test expectation update in the same commit.
What Luke is doing here is to spread the credits/blame to two people. If I were playing Luke's role, I might have squashed them into a single commit, kept the authorship of the whole thing under Blair Holloway's name, and extend the log message by mentioning that I flipped the test expectations, but I'd say either is fine for this change.
Show 29 quoted lines
>> Signed-off-by: Luke Diamand <luke@diamand.org> >> --- >> t/t9816-git-p4-locked.sh | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/t/t9816-git-p4-locked.sh b/t/t9816-git-p4-locked.sh >> index 464f10b..d048bd3 100755 >> --- a/t/t9816-git-p4-locked.sh >> +++ b/t/t9816-git-p4-locked.sh >> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ test_expect_success 'edit with lock not taken' ' >> ) >> ' >> >> -test_expect_failure 'add with lock not taken' ' >> +test_expect_success 'add with lock not taken' ' >> test_when_finished cleanup_git && >> git p4 clone --dest="$git" //depot && >> ( >> @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ test_expect_failure 'chmod with lock taken' ' >> ) >> ' >> >> -test_expect_failure 'copy with lock taken' ' >> +test_expect_success 'copy with lock taken' ' >> lock_in_another_client && >> test_when_finished cleanup_git && >> test_when_finished "cd \"$cli\" && p4 revert file2 && rm -f file2" && >> -- >> 2.3.0.rc1.30.g76afe74