On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:59:57AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Here's what I came up with on the "color.ui=always is nonsense that we > > should not offer" front. The number of patches may be a little daunting, > > but most of them are just removing cases of "git -c color.ui=always" > > from the tests. > > > > [01/12]: test-terminal: set TERM=vt100 > > [02/12]: t4015: prefer --color to -c color.diff=always > > [03/12]: t4015: use --color with --color-moved > > [04/12]: t3701: use test-terminal to collect color output > > [05/12]: t7508: use test_terminal for color output > > [06/12]: t7502: use diff.noprefix for --verbose test > > [07/12]: t6006: drop "always" color config tests > > [08/12]: t3203: drop "always" color test > > [09/12]: t7301: use test_terminal to check color > > [10/12]: t3205: use --color instead of color.branch=always > > [11/12]: provide --color option for all ref-filter users > > [12/12]: color: make "always" the same as "auto" in config > > I'm shuffling these so that everything except 03/12 and 09/12 goes > on top of jk/ref-filter-colors (to be merged later for v2.14.x) to > create jk/ui-color-always-to-auto-maint branch. Thanks, I was so busy slogging through the set of broken tests that I didn't even think that some of the cases would not be available on maint. Sorry to create work for you in untangling it. > Another branch jk/ui-color-always-to-auto would fork from 'master' > and have 03/12 and 09/12 (with a tweak to use vt100 explicitly, as > we lack 01/12 at that point) applied, and then merge the above one. > And then queuing another one that drops "env TERM=vt100" tweak added > to 09/12 would bring us to the same state as applying your 12 patches > directly on top. That will cook in 'next' down to 'master' to make > sure we do not regress in 2.15. I eyeballed what you pushed out, and it all looks good to me (looks like you did that final tweak as part of the merge of the two branches). -Peff
