Re: Introducing a test_create_repo_bare (was Re: [PATCHv2 6/6] t5543-atomic-push.sh: add basic tests for atomic pushes)
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 54 quoted lines
> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> + (
>>>> + cd upstream && git config receive.denyCurrentBranch warn
>>>> + ) &&
>>>
>>> I was wondering how you would do this part after suggesting use of
>>> test_create_repo, knowing very well that one of them was a bare one
>>> ;-).
>>>
>>> We might want to extend test_create_repo to allow creating a bare
>>> repository, but this is also OK.
>>
>> So I searching through all the tests, where it would make sense to do that.
>> I searched for "denyCurrentBranch" and came up with this list where I think
>> it makes sense to replace (git init | test_create_repo | or alike) by a
>> test_create_repo_bare or add the --bare option to test_create_repo
>>
>> places where test_create_repo_bare is easily introducable:
>> t5517-push-mirror.sh # setup an upstream repo
>> t5543-atomic-push.sh # setup an upstream repo
>> t5701-clone-local.sh # Test 'clone empty repository'
>>
>> not as easy:
>> t5400-send-pack.sh # we commit to that repo while being inside
>> t5405-send-pack-rewind.sh # we commit to that repo while being inside
>> t5516-fetch-push.sh # we test the various denyCurrentBranch options
>>
>> unsure:
>> t5522-pull-symlink.sh # just cloning the repo
>>
>> So I think we don't need the test_create_repo_bare yet.
>
> Thanks for digging.
>
> We already knew we do not *NEED* it. We have been surviving without
> one.
>
> You need to remember that adding and using a new helper is *NOT* the
> ultimate goal; categorizing those that do not want bare repositories
> as "not as easy" is misguided. They truly do not want bare, so they
> are not our target audience in the first place. For the same reason,
> "easily introduceable" is not a good criteria to look for.
>
> The issue is if some existing tests will be helped, if we had such a
> helper. That is, do we "git init --bare" by hand in some test? Are
> these tests in such a hand-crafted repositories more susceptible to
> future breakages because they do not use the template from the built
> location or they do not disable hooks? If we had such tests, then
> they would benefit by having a "bare" mode of test_create_repo.
>
>
You're right, I was looking at the wrong criteria. There are rougly 125 " --bare" outside outside of the t0001-init.sh and t5601-clone.sh which are not relying on the template nor the $GIT_EXEC_PATH/git-init
The occurrences outside these two tests are mostly init and clone with --bare although we also have a few "git --bare foo" commands to operate on the bare repos.
Looking at it the other way round it seems to be more work to fix it. :/
Stefan Beller
