On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:35:36AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > -- >8 -- > Subject: SQUASH??? > > Make sure the test does not depend on the result of the previous > tests; with MINGW prerequisite satisfied, a "reset to original and > rebuild" in an earlier test was skipped, resulting in different > history being tested with this and the next tests. Yeah, this looks good, and obviously correct. I do wonder if in general it should be the responsibility of skippable tests to make sure we end up with the same state whether they are run or not. That might manage the complexity more. But I certainly don't mind tests being defensive like you have here. -Peff