car...@cmartin.tk (Carlos Martín Nieto) writes: > Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > >> Carlos Martín Nieto <c...@elego.de> writes: >> >>> As a result of making --unset-upstream fail if the given branch >>> doesn't exist, I discovered a copy-paste error in on the the tests in >>> the patch after it, so I'm resending the whole thing. >>> >>> The changes from the last reroll are the tightening of the situations >>> where git will show an error message (not it's just if the branch is >>> new and exists as remote-tracking) which I already sent as a reply in >>> the other thread; and making --unset-upstream error out on bad input, >>> which I already mentioned above. >> >> Thanks. >> >> In addition to "--unset-upstream must fail on i-dont-exist branch" >> in [2/3], I am wondering if we would want to also make sure the >> command fails when the upstream information is not set for the >> branch, i.e. something like the following on top. >> >> What do you think? >> >> t/t3200-branch.sh | 4 +++- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git i/t/t3200-branch.sh w/t/t3200-branch.sh >> index 1018e8b..a0aaedd 100755 >> --- i/t/t3200-branch.sh >> +++ w/t/t3200-branch.sh >> @@ -393,7 +393,9 @@ test_expect_success 'test --unset-upstream on HEAD' \ >> git branch --set-upstream-to my14 && >> git branch --unset-upstream && >> test_must_fail git config branch.master.remote && >> - test_must_fail git config branch.master.merge' >> + test_must_fail git config branch.master.merge && >> + test_must_fail git branch --unset-upstream >> +' > > Yeah, this looks good, makes sure that it will still behave correctly > even if the code path for these two situations diverges.
Alright; will squash. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
