Stefan Beller wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Stefan Beller wrote: >>> Nowadays there are better tutorials out there such as "Git from bottom up" >>> or others, easily found online. Additionally to that a tutorial in our >>> test suite is not as easy to discover as e.g. online tutorials. [...] >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> t/t1200-tutorial.sh | 268 ---------------------------------------------------- >>> 1 file changed, 268 deletions(-) >>> delete mode 100755 t/t1200-tutorial.sh >> >> Interesting. When I first saw the diffstat I assumed you were talking >> about a test that validates the examples in some manpage are correct. >> But this is not that. [...] > 2ae6c70674 (Adapt tutorial to cygwin and add test case, 2005-10-13) > seemed to imply that it was testing some part for Documentation/tutorial.txt > though. Oh, good point. v1.2.0~121 (New tutorial, 2006-01-22) means that the test is no longer testing what is in the tutorial in any meaningful sense. That's why my search for "git whatchanged -p --root" in manpages didn't find anything. So what your patch does still seems reasonable (we have lived fine without a test validating the examples in that tutorial, and if we really want a test validating the examples then we should find a way to automatically extract it), but the description is misleading. With a corrected description, my Reviewed-by would apply. Thanks for catching it. Jonathan
