On Sun, Feb 04 2018, Eric Sunshine jotted:
> --- >8 ---
> for cfg in true false
> do
> for opt in '' --signoff --no-signoff
> do
> case "$opt:$cfg" in
> --signoff:*|:true) expect= ;;
> --no-signoff:*|:false) expect=! ;;
> esac
> test_expect_success "commit.signoff=$cfg & ${opt:---signoff omitted}"
> '
> git -c commit.signoff=$cfg commit --allow-empty -m x $opt &&
> eval "$expect git log -1 --format=%B | grep ^Signed-off-by:"
> '
> done
> done
> --- >8 ---
>
> A final consideration is that tests run slowly on Windows, and although
> it's nice to be thorough by testing all six combinations, you can
> probably exercise the new code sufficiently by instead testing just two
> combinations. For instance, instead of all six combinations, test just
> these two:
>
> --- >8 ---
> test_expect_success 'commit.signoff=true & --signoff omitted' '
> git -c commit.signoff=true commit --allow-empty -m x &&
> git log -1 --format=%B | grep ^Signed-off-by:
> '
>
> test_expect_success 'commit.signoff=true & --no-signoff' '
> git -c commit.signoff=true commit --allow-empty -m x --no-signoff &&
> ! git log -1 --format=%B | grep ^Signed-off-by:
> '
> --- >8 ---
I just skimmed this, but just to this question. I don't think we need to
worry about 2 v.s. 6 tests having an impact on Windows performance, it's
just massive amounts of tests like my in-flight wildmatch test series
that really matter.
But if we are worring about 2 v.s. 6 there's always my in-flight
EXPENSIVE_ON_WINDOWS prereq :)
