Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> writes: > For a while I've been wanting to teach GIT_SKIP_TESTS not to skip > tests with 'setup' or 'set up' in their name, but I never got around > to it.
Yeah, that would be a good thing. As part of doing so, we might want to come up with a way to test the tests, randomly skipping pieces that are not "setup" and find ones that break the later tests when skipped, and mark test scripts that fail such a test for fixing. > If I try to skip the setup test this patch touches, then there > is no bare.git and lots of later tests fail. Perhaps it would be > better for each test to do > > rm -fr bare.git && > git clone --bare . bare.git && > ( > cd bare.git && > ... > ) > > for itself to make the state easier to think about. That is a better and worse way to do it at the same time ;-) It definitely is better from maintainability POV to keep each test as independent as possible. It however also is worse if it forces us to be repetitive X-<. > On the other hand I agree that the 'cd' here is a bad practice. I > just don't think it's about skipping setup --- instead, it's about it > being hard to remember the cwd in general. Exactly. -- 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
