Having a simulated known breakage test means that the test
suite will always tell us there is a bug to be fixed, even
though it is only simulated.
The right way to test this is in a sub-test, that can also
check that we provide the correct exit status and output.
Fortunately, we already have such
Jeff King wrote:
I am not _that_ bothered by the known breakage, but AFAICT there is
zero benefit to keeping this redundant test.
Devil's advocate: it ensures that anyone wrapping git's tests (like
the old smoketest infrastructure experiment) is able to handle an
expected failure.
But in
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 12:51:04PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Jeff King wrote:
I am not _that_ bothered by the known breakage, but AFAICT there is
zero benefit to keeping this redundant test.
Devil's advocate: it ensures that anyone wrapping git's tests (like
the old smoketest
3 matches
Mail list logo