# [PATCH] tests: do not use "slave branch" nomenclature 5 messages from 2020-06-18 to 2020-06-19. Participants: Paolo Bonzini, Jeff King, Junio C Hamano, Michal Suchánek. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/53709 ## Paolo Bonzini, 2020-06-18 16:38 Subject: [PATCH] tests: do not use "slave branch" nomenclature Message-ID: <20200618163843.22181-1-bonzini@gnu.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20200618163843.22181-1-bonzini%40gnu.org ``` From: Paolo Bonzini Git does not have slave branches and has never had. Independent of any future change to the naming of branches, remove the sole appearance of the term. Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini --- t/t4014-format-patch.sh | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t4014-format-patch.sh b/t/t4014-format-patch.sh index 575e079cc2..3e5b921b0f 100755 --- a/t/t4014-format-patch.sh +++ b/t/t4014-format-patch.sh @@ -81,16 +81,16 @@ test_expect_success 'format-patch --ignore-if-in-upstream handles tags' ' ' test_expect_success "format-patch doesn't consider merge commits" ' - git checkout -b slave master && + git checkout -b branch master && echo "Another line" >>file && test_tick && - git commit -am "Slave change #1" && + git commit -am "Branch change #1" && echo "Yet another line" >>file && test_tick && - git commit -am "Slave change #2" && + git commit -am "Branch change #2" && git checkout -b merger master && test_tick && - git merge --no-ff slave && + git merge --no-ff branch && git format-patch -3 --stdout >patch && grep "^From " patch >from && test_line_count = 3 from -- 2.25.4 ``` ## Jeff King, 2020-06-18 16:45 Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: do not use "slave branch" nomenclature Message-ID: <20200618164554.GA616157@coredump.intra.peff.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20200618164554.GA616157%40coredump.intra.peff.net In-Reply-To: <20200618163843.22181-1-bonzini@gnu.org> ``` On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 06:38:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > From: Paolo Bonzini > > Git does not have slave branches and has never had. Independent > of any future change to the naming of branches, remove the sole > appearance of the term. I think this is a sensible change, though note that something simpler was proposed recently: https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200610165441.iktvzuwz44sbytfg@chatter.i7.local/ and the review suggested using a name that is even more meaningful to the test case (so we not just remove the unwanted names, but make the test easier to follow). -Peff ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2020-06-18 18:08 Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: do not use "slave branch" nomenclature Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/xmqqwo44nt6m.fsf%40gitster.c.googlers.com In-Reply-To: <20200618164554.GA616157@coredump.intra.peff.net> ``` Jeff King writes: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 06:38:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> From: Paolo Bonzini >> >> Git does not have slave branches and has never had. Independent >> of any future change to the naming of branches, remove the sole >> appearance of the term. > > I think this is a sensible change, though note that something simpler > was proposed recently: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200610165441.iktvzuwz44sbytfg@chatter.i7.local/ > > and the review suggested using a name that is even more meaningful to > the test case (so we not just remove the unwanted names, but make the > test easier to follow). Thanks for spotting that both versions share the same issue. We'd just need a single one that is fixed up ;-). ``` ## Michal Suchánek, 2020-06-19 09:20 Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: do not use "slave branch" nomenclature Message-ID: <20200619092035.GQ21462@kitsune.suse.cz> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20200619092035.GQ21462%40kitsune.suse.cz In-Reply-To: ``` On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:08:01AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 06:38:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > >> From: Paolo Bonzini > >> > >> Git does not have slave branches and has never had. Independent > >> of any future change to the naming of branches, remove the sole > >> appearance of the term. > > > > I think this is a sensible change, though note that something simpler > > was proposed recently: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200610165441.iktvzuwz44sbytfg@chatter.i7.local/ > > > > and the review suggested using a name that is even more meaningful to > > the test case (so we not just remove the unwanted names, but make the > > test easier to follow). > > Thanks for spotting that both versions share the same issue. We'd > just need a single one that is fixed up ;-). How about s/slave/feature/ This is about simulating some development happening on the new branch so this name looks appropriate. Thanks Michal ``` ## Paolo Bonzini, 2020-06-19 09:23 Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: do not use "slave branch" nomenclature Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/b4259ac0-9510-8d01-0e71-f11b4a193123%40gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20200619092035.GQ21462@kitsune.suse.cz> ``` On 19/06/20 11:20, Michal Suchánek wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:08:01AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Jeff King writes: >> >>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 06:38:43PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> >>>> From: Paolo Bonzini >>>> >>>> Git does not have slave branches and has never had. Independent >>>> of any future change to the naming of branches, remove the sole >>>> appearance of the term. >>> >>> I think this is a sensible change, though note that something simpler >>> was proposed recently: >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200610165441.iktvzuwz44sbytfg@chatter.i7.local/ >>> >>> and the review suggested using a name that is even more meaningful to >>> the test case (so we not just remove the unwanted names, but make the >>> test easier to follow). >> >> Thanks for spotting that both versions share the same issue. We'd >> just need a single one that is fixed up ;-). > How about s/slave/feature/ > > This is about simulating some development happening on the new branch so > this name looks appropriate. Indeed I was going to send v2 with topic or feature. Thanks, Paolo ```