Felipe Contreras wrote: > Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks for writing tests. I think there is room for a few lines of explanation above. [...] > --- a/t/t4203-mailmap.sh > +++ b/t/t4203-mailmap.sh > @@ -255,4 +255,22 @@ test_expect_success 'Blame output (complex mapping)' ' > test_cmp expect actual.fuzz > ' > > +# git blame > +cat >expect <<\EOF > +^OBJI (<author@xxxxxxxxxxx> DATE 1) one > +OBJID (<some@xxxxxxx> DATE 2) two > +OBJID (<other@xxxxxxxxx> DATE 3) three > +OBJID (<other@xxxxxxxxx> DATE 4) four > +OBJID (<santa.claus@xxxxxxxxxxxx> DATE 5) five > +OBJID (<santa.claus@xxxxxxxxxxxx> DATE 6) six > +OBJID (<cto@xxxxxxxxxx> DATE 7) seven > +EOF > +test_expect_success 'Blame output (complex mapping)' ' Since I didn't receive a copy of the cover letter or patch 1, I don't know what this is intended to test _for_. Good --- I can more easily convey the reaction of future readers who do not necessarily know the context in which the patch was written (and the commit message does not seem to say). Looking above, I see - a lone comment "git blame". What is it trying to tell me? I guess you copy/pasted it, but is there any purpose to it? - a test asserting the claim "Blame output (complex mapping)". This title is identical to the test before. I have no idea what this is about. Puzzled, Jonathan -- 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