Re: [PATCH v1 2/6] Status and checkout unit tests for --porcelain[=<n>]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 07/20/2016 11:19 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi Jeff,

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Jeff Hostetler wrote:

Simple unit tests to validate the argument parsing.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

They are simple alright, but do we really need so many of them? I would
like to keep the ones in t7060, but I do not think that we necessarily
have to add the t7501 ones.

I know I am a bit at odds here with Junio, who frequently prefers more
tests. It's just that I have to run the complete test suite so often and
it does take 30-45 minutes to run here (due to the fact that the test
suite exercises quite a lot of the POSIX emulation layer via shell
scripting).

So do not take my suggestions as the sole basis for deciding how to go
from here.

I'm open to suggestion here.  I mainly wanted to be able to
prove that adding "=1" didn't affect the output and that an invalid
parameter throws.  We could eliminate several of the "more trivial"
ones if that would help.

Jeff

--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]