Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> +test_alternate_usage() {
According to Documentation/CodingGuidelines, this should be:
test_alternate_usage () {
Somehow the helper name sounds as if it is testing if an alternate
is used correctly (i.e. the machinery may attempt to use alternate
but not in a correct way), not testing if an alternate is correctly
used (i.e. the machinery incorrectly forgets to use an alternate at
all), but maybe it is just me.
> +test_expect_success 'updating superproject keeps alternates' '
> + test_when_finished "rm -rf super-clone" &&
This one is new; we do not remove A, B or super. According to the
previous round of review, this is a deliberate design, that needs to
be spelled out by having a comment block before this test so that
other people who add more tests can understand why they need to
clean when they follow suit. Perhaps something like:
###############################################################
# The tests up to this point, and repositories created by them
# (A, B, super and super/sub), are about setting up the stage
# forsubsequent tests and meant to be kept throughout the
# remainder of the test.
# Tests from here on, if they create their own test repository,
# are expected to clean after themselves.
test_expect_success 'updating superproject keeps alternates' '
test_when_finished "rm -rf super-clone" &&
--
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