Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Romuald Brunet <romuald@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> +test_expect_success 'atomic option possible via git-config' '
>> + # prepare the repo
>> + mk_repo_pair &&
>> + (
>> + cd workbench &&
>> + test_commit one &&
>> + git checkout -b second master &&
>> + test_commit two &&
>> + git push --mirror up
>> + ) &&
>> + # a third party modifies the server side:
>> + (
>> + cd upstream &&
>> + git checkout second &&
>> + git tag test_tag second
>> + ) &&
>> + # see if we can now push both branches.
>> + (
>> + cd workbench &&
>> + git config push.atomic true &&
>> + git checkout master &&
>> + test_commit three &&
>> + git checkout second &&
>> + test_commit four &&
>> + git tag test_tag &&
>> + test_must_fail git push --tags up master second
>> + ) &&
>> + test_refs master HEAD@{3} &&
>> + test_refs second HEAD@{1}
>> +'
>> +
>
> Sent my earlier E-Mail too soon, so I missed this, there's no test
> here for what "git config push.atomic false" && "git push --atomic"
> does, is that atomic or not? I.e. what does "git -c push.atomic=false
> push --atomic" do? Does the CLI option override the config as it
> should?
Good points. Thanks for reading and reviewing the tests carefully.