Hi Paul, On 2015-07-07 08:47, Paul Tan wrote: > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Johannes Schindelin > <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> wrote: >> On 2015-07-02 20:16, Paul Tan wrote: >> >>> diff --git a/t/t4150-am.sh b/t/t4150-am.sh >>> index dd6fe81..62b678c 100755 >>> --- a/t/t4150-am.sh >>> +++ b/t/t4150-am.sh >>> @@ -275,6 +275,48 @@ test_expect_success 'am with failing pre-applypatch >>> hook' ' >>> test_cmp_rev first HEAD >>> ' >>> >>> +test_expect_success 'am with post-applypatch hook' ' >>> + test_when_finished "rm -f .git/hooks/post-applypatch" && >>> + rm -fr .git/rebase-apply && >>> + git reset --hard && >>> + git checkout first && >>> + mkdir -p .git/hooks && >>> + cat >.git/hooks/post-applypatch <<-\EOF && >>> + #!/bin/sh >>> + git rev-parse HEAD >head.actual >>> + git diff second >diff.actual >>> + exit 0 >>> + EOF >>> + chmod +x .git/hooks/post-applypatch && >>> + git am patch1 && >>> + test_path_is_missing .git/rebase-apply && >>> + test_cmp_rev second HEAD && >>> + git rev-parse second >head.expected && >>> + test_cmp head.expected head.actual && >>> + git diff second >diff.expected && >>> + test_cmp diff.expected diff.actual >>> +' >>> + >>> +test_expect_success 'am with failing post-applypatch hook' ' >>> + test_when_finished "rm -f .git/hooks/post-applypatch" && >>> + rm -fr .git/rebase-apply && >>> + git reset --hard && >>> + git checkout first && >>> + mkdir -p .git/hooks && >>> + cat >.git/hooks/post-applypatch <<-\EOF && >>> + #!/bin/sh >>> + git rev-parse HEAD >head.actual >>> + exit 1 >>> + EOF >>> + chmod +x .git/hooks/post-applypatch && >>> + git am patch1 && >>> + test_path_is_missing .git/rebase-apply && >>> + git diff --exit-code second && >>> + test_cmp_rev second HEAD && >>> + git rev-parse second >head.expected && >>> + test_cmp head.expected head.actual >>> +' >> >> These 2 tests as well as the previous patches look to me as if they could be >> refactored (the paradigm is the same: add a certain hook after resetting and >> then apply the patch, verify that the hook ran/failed)... do you think there >> is a chance for that? > > I had a look, but I think that while it is true that the overall > sequence of each test is the same, the details differ enough that > there's no obvious way to refactor the tests sensibly. For example, > the contents of the hook scripts are not the same, as we need to check > that the hooks are run at the correct stage of git-am execution. And > as such, the verification tests are also different as well.
Yeah, makes sense. Thanks for the clarification! Ciao, Dscho -- 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
