Eric Sunshine writes:
> Although I'm the one who brought up the idea of "automating" these
> tests, I'm not convinced that it's an improvement in this case, but I
> don't feel so strongly that I'd forbid it.
Another option is to define helper functions to shorten the "manual"
tests, e.g. define:
Mehul Jain writes:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Matthieu Moy
> wrote:
>> I think it would be much simpler to drop the loop, and write instead
>> something like (untested):
>
> I tested it (with few minor changes), and worked fine.
>
> test_autostash () {
> OLDIFS=$IFS
> IFS
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Mehul Jain wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Matthieu Moy
> wrote:
>> I think it would be much simpler to drop the loop, and write instead
>> something like (untested):
>
> I tested it (with few minor changes), and worked fine.
>
> test_autostash () {
>
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Matthieu Moy
wrote:
> I think it would be much simpler to drop the loop, and write instead
> something like (untested):
I tested it (with few minor changes), and worked fine.
test_autostash () {
OLDIFS=$IFS
IFS='='
set -- $*
IFS=$O
Mehul Jain writes:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Eric Sunshine
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Mehul Jain wrote:
>>> In test_autostash() there's a line
>>>
>>> echo test_cmp_rev HEAD^ copy &&
>>>
>>> Originally it should have been
>>>
>>> test_cmp_rev HEAD^ copy &&
>>>
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Mehul Jain wrote:
>> In test_autostash() there's a line
>>
>> echo test_cmp_rev HEAD^ copy &&
>>
>> Originally it should have been
>>
>> test_cmp_rev HEAD^ copy &&
>>
>> but this raise following error
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Mehul Jain wrote:
> I tried out this method also. Below is the script that I wrote for this:
>
> test_autostash () {
> OLDIFS=$IFS
> IFS=',='
> while read -r expect cmd config_variable value
> do
> test_expect_success "$cmd, $config_varia
Hi Eric,
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:01 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> One other possibility would be to make this all table-driven by
> collecting all of the above state information into a table and then
> feeding that into a function (either as its argument list or via
> stdin). For instance:
>
>
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Mehul Jain wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Eric Sunshine
> wrote:
>> With the exception of the missing --rebase argument, this is exactly
>> the same code as in test_rebase_autostash(), right? Rather than
>> repeating this code yet again, it might be ni
Hi Eric,
Thanks for the reviews on this series.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> With the exception of the missing --rebase argument, this is exactly
> the same code as in test_rebase_autostash(), right? Rather than
> repeating this code yet again, it might be nice to augm
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Mehul Jain wrote:
> "--[no-]autostash" option for git-pull is only valid in rebase mode.
> That is, either --rebase is used or pull.rebase=true. Existing tests
> already check the cases when --rebase is used but fails to check for
> pull.rebase=true case.
>
> Add t
"--[no-]autostash" option for git-pull is only valid in rebase mode.
That is, either --rebase is used or pull.rebase=true. Existing tests
already check the cases when --rebase is used but fails to check for
pull.rebase=true case.
Add two new tests to check that --[no-]autostash option works with
p
12 matches
Mail list logo
