On Thu, 2 Nov 2017 12:41:44 -0700
Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote:
> @@ -239,6 +239,8 @@ void traverse_commit_list(struct rev_info *revs,
> if (commit->tree)
> add_pending_tree(revs, commit->tree);
> show_commit(commit, data);
> + if (revs->tree_blobs_in_commit_order)
> + traverse_trees_and_blobs(revs, &csp, show_object, data);
> }
> traverse_trees_and_blobs(revs, &csp, show_object, data);
>
I would have expected add_pending_tree() above to no longer be invoked.
If it still needs to be invoked, maybe add an explanation in the form of
a comment or commit message.
> +test_expect_success 'rev-list --in-commit-order' '
> + for x in one two three four
> + do
> + echo $x >$x &&
> + git add $x &&
> + git commit -m "add file $x" ||
> + return 1
> + done &&
> + for x in four three
> + do
> + git rm $x &&
> + git commit -m "remove $x" ||
> + return 1
> + done &&
> + git rev-list --in-commit-order --objects HEAD >actual.raw &&
> + cut -c 1-40 >actual <actual.raw &&
> +
> + git cat-file --batch-check="%(objectname)" >expect.raw <<-\EOF &&
> + HEAD^{commit}
> + HEAD^{tree}
> + HEAD^{tree}:one
> + HEAD^{tree}:two
> + HEAD~1^{commit}
> + HEAD~1^{tree}
> + HEAD~1^{tree}:three
> + HEAD~2^{commit}
> + HEAD~2^{tree}
> + HEAD~2^{tree}:four
> + HEAD~3^{commit}
> + # HEAD~3^{tree} skipped, same as HEAD~1^{tree}
> + HEAD~4^{commit}
> + # HEAD~4^{tree} skipped, same as HEAD^{tree}
> + HEAD~5^{commit}
> + HEAD~5^{tree}
> + EOF
> + grep -v "#" >expect <expect.raw &&
> +
> + test_cmp expect actual
> +'
Would it be useful to have another test without --in-commit-order, so
that we can see the difference (and ensure that existing behavior is
unchanged)?
