On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Mehul Jain <mehul.jain2029@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Matthieu Moy > <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This is a double-post. You've posted almost the same message under the >> title "GSoC 2016". Nothing serious, but attention to details is >> important if you want to give a good image of yourself. > > I'm sorry of this kind of behavior. It was due to a misunderstanding by my side. > >> I don't have all the code in mind, but I think it is. In this situation, >> you always end up with a variable telling Git what to do (I guess, >> autostash here), and this variable is set according to the configuration >> and the command-line. >> >> You should be careful about the precedence: command-line should override >> the configuration. And the default behavior should be used if neither >> the command-line nor the configuration specified otherwise. > > Thanks for the suggestion. > I've started the work on patch and did the change in the code which > were necessary for Microproject. I have run the test by using "make", > and there was no failure of any test. > I've a doubt regarding tests. Here as "git pull" will now understand > the argument that "--[no-]autostash" means "rebase.autostash" should > be set false for current execution of command "git pull --rebase". So > do I have to write a test for this new option? > Yes, most likely t/t5521-pull-options.sh or t/t5520-pull.sh would be the right place as judging from the file name of the tests. Thanks, Stefan > Mehul Jain > -- > 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 -- 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