# [PATCH] t9600: allow testing with cvsps 2.2, including beta versions 4 messages from 2008-07-15 to 2008-07-16. Participants: Pavel Roskin, Junio C Hamano, Jeff King. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/14456 ## Pavel Roskin, 2008-07-15 00:20 Subject: [PATCH] t9600: allow testing with cvsps 2.2, including beta versions Message-ID: <20080715002019.5337.81984.stgit@dv.roinet.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20080715002019.5337.81984.stgit%40dv.roinet.com ``` Don't assume that unsupported versions are too old, they may be too new. Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin --- t/t9600-cvsimport.sh | 4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh b/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh index 655f882..f92b47a 100755 --- a/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh +++ b/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh @@ -20,13 +20,15 @@ cvsps_version=`cvsps -h 2>&1 | sed -ne 's/cvsps version //p'` case "$cvsps_version" in 2.1) ;; +2.2*) + ;; '') say 'skipping cvsimport tests, cvsps not found' test_done exit ;; *) - say 'skipping cvsimport tests, cvsps too old' + say 'skipping cvsimport tests, unsupported cvsps version' test_done exit ;; ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2008-07-15 00:31 Subject: Re: [PATCH] t9600: allow testing with cvsps 2.2, including beta versions Message-ID: <7v1w1wdm37.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7v1w1wdm37.fsf%40gitster.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: <20080715002019.5337.81984.stgit@dv.roinet.com> ``` Pavel Roskin writes: > Don't assume that unsupported versions are too old, they may be too new. Excuse me, but we never assumed such. Neither too old nor too new ones are proven to work with us yet, so we cannot be call them supported. Let's apply your patch and see how well version 2.2 fares. Thanks. > diff --git a/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh b/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh > index 655f882..f92b47a 100755 > --- a/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh > +++ b/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh > @@ -20,13 +20,15 @@ cvsps_version=`cvsps -h 2>&1 | sed -ne 's/cvsps version //p'` > case "$cvsps_version" in > 2.1) > ;; > +2.2*) > + ;; Hmm, I would have written: case "$..." in 2.1 | 2.2 ) Is the reason why you have the asterisk there because the beta one claims "2.2beta" or something (I am not suggesting to tighten the match, just asking for information)? ``` ## Pavel Roskin, 2008-07-15 00:51 Subject: Re: [PATCH] t9600: allow testing with cvsps 2.2, including beta versions Message-ID: <20080714205114.cnwynr1q804wow4k-cebfxv@webmail.spamcop.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20080714205114.cnwynr1q804wow4k-cebfxv%40webmail.spamcop.net In-Reply-To: <7v1w1wdm37.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> ``` Quoting Junio C Hamano : > Pavel Roskin writes: > >> Don't assume that unsupported versions are too old, they may be too new. > > Excuse me, but we never assumed such. > > Neither too old nor too new ones are proven to work with us yet, so we > cannot be call them supported. The message was "skipping cvsimport tests, cvsps too old" so the assumption was there. > Let's apply your patch and see how well version 2.2 fares. > > Thanks. > >> diff --git a/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh b/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh >> index 655f882..f92b47a 100755 >> --- a/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh >> +++ b/t/t9600-cvsimport.sh >> @@ -20,13 +20,15 @@ cvsps_version=`cvsps -h 2>&1 | sed -ne 's/cvsps >> version //p'` >> case "$cvsps_version" in >> 2.1) >> ;; >> +2.2*) >> + ;; > > Hmm, I would have written: > > case "$..." in > 2.1 | 2.2 ) Fine with me, but please allow for extra specifiers. > Is the reason why you have the asterisk there because the beta one claims > "2.2beta" or something (I am not suggesting to tighten the match, just > asking for information)? It's cvsps 2.2b1 from Fedora Development (cvsps-2.2-0.1.b1.fc10.x86_64) $ cvsps -h 2>&1 | grep version cvsps version 2.2b1 -- Regards, Pavel Roskin ``` ## Jeff King, 2008-07-16 07:11 Subject: Re: [PATCH] t9600: allow testing with cvsps 2.2, including beta versions Message-ID: <20080716071147.GC4030@segfault.peff.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20080716071147.GC4030%40segfault.peff.net In-Reply-To: <20080714205114.cnwynr1q804wow4k-cebfxv@webmail.spamcop.net> ``` On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 08:51:14PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > Excuse me, but we never assumed such. > > > > Neither too old nor too new ones are proven to work with us yet, so we > > cannot be call them supported. > > The message was "skipping cvsimport tests, cvsps too old" so the > assumption was there. Heh, you can blame me for making that assumption. But at the time I wrote it, I think cvsps development had stagnated, so there weren't new versions. :) -Peff ```