Jeff Hostetler <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Test porcelain v2 status format. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > t/t7064-wtstatus-pv2.sh | 576 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 576 insertions(+) > create mode 100755 t/t7064-wtstatus-pv2.sh > > diff --git a/t/t7064-wtstatus-pv2.sh b/t/t7064-wtstatus-pv2.sh > new file mode 100755 > index 0000000..44a8671 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/t/t7064-wtstatus-pv2.sh > @@ -0,0 +1,576 @@ > +#!/bin/sh > + > +test_description='git status --porcelain=v2 > + > +This test exercises porcelain V2 output for git status.' A general comment on the titles; with retitling of individual tests, the result has become a lot easier to understand. I know coming up with a short and to-the-point description for them is hard, but that is effort and time well spent and it shows in the result. Thanks. > +. ./test-lib.sh > + > +OID_EMPTY=e69de29bb2d1d6434b8b29ae775ad8c2e48c5391 It seems that test-lib.sh these days has EMPTY_BLOB defined for your use. You can remove this and replace its use (just two lines) with $EMPTY_BLOB down in the "add -N" test. > +test_expect_success setup ' > + test_tick && > + git config --local core.autocrlf false && I'd suggest removing "--local". Existing use of "git config" in the test suite, unless their use is about testing "git config" itself to validate the operation of the --local/--global/--system options, do not seem to explicitly say "--local", which is the default anyway. > +test_expect_success 'after first commit, make dirt, confirm unstaged changes' ' Did you mean s/dirt/dirty/? "make and confirm unstaged changes" would be sufficient. Because "confirming" is implicit (as these are all tests), "after the first commit, modify working tree files" might even be better, perhaps? > + echo x >>file_x && > + OID_X1=$(git hash-object -t blob -- file_x) && > + rm file_z && > + H0=$(git rev-parse HEAD) && > + ... > +test_expect_success 'after first commit, stage dirt, confirm staged changes' ' What you "git add" is meant to be good changes, so they are no longer dirt ;-) More importantly, because I never heard of "dirt" used in Git context, it is unclear if it is an untracked file, a modification that is not meant to be committed immediately, or what. "after the first commit, fully add changes to the index"? > + git add file_x && > + git rm file_z && > + H0=$(git rev-parse HEAD) && > + > + cat >expect <<-EOF && > + # branch.oid $H0 > + # branch.head master > + 1 M. N... 100644 100644 100644 $OID_X $OID_X1 file_x > + 1 D. N... 100644 000000 000000 $OID_Z $_z40 file_z > + ? actual > + ? expect > + EOF > +test_expect_success 'after first commit, also stage rename, confirm 2 path line format' ' > + git mv file_y renamed_y && > + H0=$(git rev-parse HEAD) && > + > + q_to_tab >expect <<-EOF && > + # branch.oid $H0 > + # branch.head master > + 1 M. N... 100644 100644 100644 $OID_X $OID_X1 file_x > + 1 D. N... 100644 000000 000000 $OID_Z $_z40 file_z > + 2 R. N... 100644 100644 100644 $OID_Y $OID_Y R100 renamed_yQfile_y > + ? actual > + ? expect > + EOF > + > + git status --porcelain=v2 --branch --untracked-files=all >actual && > + test_cmp expect actual > +' Do we want to test -z format on this, too? > ... > +test_expect_success 'create ignored files, confirm they are not printed' ' > +test_expect_success 'create ignored files, confirm --ignored prints them' ' > ... These are all good and readably titled. > +test_expect_success 'verify upstream fields in branch header' ' > + git checkout master && > + test_when_finished rm -rf sub_repo && Forgot to quote? -- 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