On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 19:13, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> And actually, we should probably have a >> test_commit_notag() then. > > I don’t know. What’s so bad about using "git commit" directly? Nothing, it's just easier to write and read the tests when we have and use functions for these common operations. > I often find myself using "git commit" in tests because test_commit > imposes all the usual restrictions for a ref name on the commit > message. I would happily use an abbreviation for > > test_tick && > git commit -m "something" && > git tag something-else > > if available because I don’t like typing, but would that help the > reader and test runner any? Maybe just introduce a fourth argument to test_commit, to make it <message> [<file> [<contents> [<tagname>]] instead of <message> [<file> [<contents>]] ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html