On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 09:59:58AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> >> Hi Junio, Peff, >> >> I thought about this patch squashed into >> "clone: do not let --depth imply --shallow-submodules" will actually test >> for the regression. > > Yep, it looks good to me. > >> +test_expect_success 'shallow clone does not imply shallow submodule' ' >> + test_when_finished "rm -rf super_clone" && >> + git clone --recurse-submodules --depth 2 "file://$pwd/." super_clone && >> + ( >> + cd super_clone && >> + git log --oneline >lines && >> + test_line_count = 2 lines >> + ) && >> + ( >> + cd super_clone/sub && >> + git log --oneline >lines && >> + test_line_count = 3 lines >> + ) >> +' > > This follows the style of the other tests, so it's the right thing here. > But as a style suggestion, I think: > > git -C super_clone/sub log --oneline >lines && > test_line_count = 3 lines > > is nicer than the subshell. It's more succinct, and it saves a process. which we would want to refactor to in a follow up, but not merge it through to 2.9.1. Thanks, Stefan > > -Peff -- 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