On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 09:35:12AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:39:35AM +0200, Clemens Buchacher wrote:
> > ...
> >> > +test_expect_success 'cherry pick an empty non-ff commit with --allow-empty' '
> >> > + git checkout master && {
> >> > + git cherry-pick --allow-empty empty-branch2
> >> > + }
> >> > +'
> >> > +
> >> > +test_expect_success 'cherry pick with --keep-redundant-commits' '
> >> > + git checkout master && {
> >> > + git cherry-pick --keep-redundant-commits HEAD^
> >> > + }
> >> > +'
> >>
> >> And the expected result is that the HEAD commit is not removed, right?
> >> You should check for that as well.
> >>
> >> Also, please checkout empty-branch2^0 first, in order to make the test
> >> independent of its predecessor.
> >
> > Not sure I follow what your saying here. The expected result with both of these
> > tests is that a new commit is created, referencing the current HEAD as the new
> > HEAD's parent.
>
> If the request were "checkout master^0 first" I would understand. The
> precondition for the second test will be different depending on the first
> one succeeds or not. Perhaps that is what Clemens meant?
>
Perhaps, but if so, I'm still not sure how a checkout of empty-branch2^0 affects
these tests at all, nor do I grok the relevance to ensuring that the HEAD commit
wasn't removed (as AIUI, cherry pick never does that anyway). Clement, can you
clarify your thoughts here please?
Neil
--
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