From: "Joachim Schmitz" <j...@schmitz-digital.de>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 2:19 PM
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Barry Wardell <barry.ward...@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
Thanks for your persistence ;-) As this is a pretty old topic, I'll
give two URLs for people who are interested to view the previous
threads:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/192133
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/192127
You would want to mark it as test_expect_failure in the first patch
and then flip it to text_expect_success in the second patch where
you fix the breakage? Otherwise, after applying the first patch,
the testsuite will break needlessly.
I'd just apply them the other way round, 1st fix the problem, 2nd add
a test for it
Isn't it a case of, 1st demonstrate the problem with a test, and then
2nd fix the problem.
Those less principled could could simply "fix" a non-existent problem
merely to get themselves into the change log, or worse, even if one may
fix-test under the hood.
Bye, Jojo
Philip
--
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
