On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 6:31 AM Derrick Stolee <stolee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 9/21/2018 7:58 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: > > The old formatting style is a real hindrance of getting people up to speed > > contributing as they use existing code as an example and follow that style. > > So let's get rid of the old style and reformat it in our current style. > I was suspicious of your automated approach catching everything, so I > looked carefully at this patch. There are still a lot of things > happening that we would not recommend doing in new tests. Heh, thanks for calling that out. So we're looking at a full formatter instead of a partial formatter that helps moving in the right direction now. :-/ I would prefer to use automation as much as possible for these tasks to keep it easy to apply it at scale once a file is not touched by master..pu any more. When applying styles manually, there is sometimes a judgement call, which would like to the inevitable bikeshedding that I'd prefer to avoid. > > +test_expect_success 'moving the file out of subdirectory' ' > > + cd path0 && git mv COPYING ../path1/COPYING > > +' > Perhaps split this line on the &&? In real modern testing, this could also be git -C path0 mv ... which would also fix the cd.. below and not needing a subshell there either (using -C again). Looking at this from a higher level, nowadays I would write tests that have more lines in them, instead of having one git command per test. > > +test_expect_success 'moving to existing tracked target with trailing slash' ' > > + mkdir path2 && > > + >path2/file && git add path2/file && > This line in particular looks a bit strange. What is this doing? At > least we should split the &&. Yes. > > +test_expect_success 'do not move directory over existing directory' ' > > + mkdir path0 && mkdir path0/path2 && test_must_fail git mv path2 path0 > > +' > > Split this line. Okay, I'll go manually over these tests to adapt to new style. Thanks for looking over the patch! Stefan