Jeff King schrieb am 21.11.2014 um 19:01:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 05:08:19PM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:
git add foo bar adds neither foo nor bar when bar is ignored, but dies
to let the user recheck their command invocation. This becomes less
helpful when git add foo.* is subject to
Torsten Bögershausen schrieb am 22.11.2014 um 15:59:
+test_expect_success 'error out when attempting to add ignored ones but add
others' '
+ touch a.if
+ test_must_fail git add a.??
+ ! (git ls-files | grep \\.ig)
+ (git ls-files | grep a.if)
+'
I am somewhat allergic to pipes
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:10:47AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
... Possibly because I do not know that those instructions
are written down anywhere. We usually catch such things in review these
days, but there are many
On 2014-11-24 18.41, Junio C Hamano wrote:
...
Do we refer to t/README from CodingGuidelines where we tell the
developers to always write tests to prevent other people from
breaking tomorrow what you did today? If not, perhaps that is what
needs to be added.
That might make sense. It might
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 09:41:00AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
We actually do not have a reference to it anywhere. For now, this
should suffice.
Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
... Possibly because I do not know that those instructions
are written down anywhere. We usually catch such things in review these
days, but there are many inconsistent spots in the existing suite.
t/README has this
Don't:
- use '! git cmd' when you
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:10:47AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
... Possibly because I do not know that those instructions
are written down anywhere. We usually catch such things in review these
days, but there are many inconsistent spots in the existing
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 10:20:10PM +0100, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
I do not think there is a real _downside_ to using test_must_fail for
grep, except that it is a bit more verbose.
We may burn CPU cycles
It adds a single if/else chain. If your shell does not implement that as
a fast
+test_expect_success 'error out when attempting to add ignored ones but add
others' '
+touch a.if
+test_must_fail git add a.??
+! (git ls-files | grep \\.ig)
+(git ls-files | grep a.if)
+'
I am somewhat allergic to pipes in our test suite, because they can mask
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 03:59:12PM +0100, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
+test_expect_success 'error out when attempting to add ignored ones but
add others' '
+ touch a.if
+ test_must_fail git add a.??
+ ! (git ls-files | grep \\.ig)
+ (git ls-files | grep a.if)
+'
[...]
2
On 2014-11-22 20.19, Jeff King wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 03:59:12PM +0100, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
+test_expect_success 'error out when attempting to add ignored ones but
add others' '
+ touch a.if
+ test_must_fail git add a.??
+ ! (git ls-files | grep \\.ig)
+ (git
git add foo bar adds neither foo nor bar when bar is ignored, but dies
to let the user recheck their command invocation. This becomes less
helpful when git add foo.* is subject to shell expansion and some of
the expanded files are ignored.
git add --ignore-errors is supposed to ignore errors when
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 05:08:19PM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:
git add foo bar adds neither foo nor bar when bar is ignored, but dies
to let the user recheck their command invocation. This becomes less
helpful when git add foo.* is subject to shell expansion and some of
the expanded files
13 matches
Mail list logo
