On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 03:42:24 +0000 > On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:44:41 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I'd like to have part of the tests in this patch at the beginning of the >> series to document and protect the behaviour of the current --date related >> options, then your enhancement that adds --zone that lets the users >> specify the timezone and the format independently, and finally the >> remainder of this patch as an addition to the test script to document and >> protect the interaction between the two options (e.g. what happens when >> none or only one is specified? what happens when conflicting options such >> as "--date=local --zone=gmt" is given?). > > I would split it up as requested, but I'm not sure that it's worthwhile; > while there is a certain appeal to such a natural progression, my feeling > is that the separate patches won't turn out to be usefully smaller (and > thus more easily verified, as I'm sure you desire), because every data > structure and code path deals with both simultaneously. Maybe I spoke to soon; let me play around with it. Still, though: > Moreover, the beauty of your proposed progression is lost on the fact that > these patches will be applied so close in time to each other; why bother > dealing with solely date mode formats when such a version will almost > certainly never be used? > > Thus, it seems cleaner just to introduce the whole set of tests in one go. -- 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