Doug Kelly <dougk....@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >> Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> writes: >> >>>> + (git am --abort || true) && >> >> Why (x || y)? Is 'x' so unreliable that we do not know how should exit? >> Should this be "test_must_fail git am --abort"? >> > Updated to test_might_fail -- we don't know if a merge is in progress or not. > We still need to clean up, but disregard failure if a merge isn't in progress.
Ah, OK. But even with "test_might_fail", it may not be clear why it might fail, so it would be easier to maintain if we can read "we don't know if a merge is in progress" next to the "test_might_fail". For now we can add a comment, but in the longer term it might not be a bad idea to change test_might_fail to require two args, one is a command to run and the other is a text that explains why the outcome is unknown. Thanks for clarifying. -- 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
