On Thu, 13 Dec 2018, Stefan Beller wrote: > > cool, thanks for the feedback - I will then try to make it happen > > quick one (so when I get to it I know): should I replicate all those > > tests you have for other update strategies? (treating of config > > specifications etc) > If there is a sensible way to do so? > I have the impression that there are enough differences, that it > may not be possible to replicate all tests meaningfully from the > other modes. oh, by replicate I just meant to copy/paste and adjust for expected for --reset-hard test behavior (and possibly introduced helper), nothing fancy, just duplication as for replication ;-) > > There is no easy way to parametrize them somehow? > There is t/lib-submodule-update.sh, which brings this to > an extreme, as it makes a "test suite in a test suite"; and I would > not follow that example for this change. ok > > ;) In Python world I might have mocked the actual underlying call to > > update, to see what option it would be getting and assure that it is the > > one I specified via config, and then sweepped through all of them > > to make sure nothing interim changes it. Just wondering if may be > > something like that exists in git's tests support. > gits tests are very heavy on end to end testing, i.e. run a whole command > and observe its output. This makes our command setup code, (i.e. finding > the repository, parsing options, reading possible config, etc) a really well > exercised code path. ;-) > There is a recent push towards testing only units, most of > t/helper is used for that, e.g. c.f. 4c7bb45269 (test-reach: > test get_reachable_subset, 2018-11-02). > So if you have a good idea how to focus the submodule > tests more on the (new) unit that you add, that would be cool. no, not really any good ideas -- I am new here, but I will keep an eye open. > > BTW - sorry if RTFM and unrelated, is there a way to > > update --merge > > but allowing only fast-forwards? My use case is collection of this > > submodules: http://datasets.datalad.org/?dir=/openneuro which all > > should come from github and I should not have any changes of my own. > So you want the merge option --ff-only > to be passed to the submodule merge command. I guess you could make > a patch, that update takes another option (--ff-only, only useful when > --merge is given), which is then propagated. > I am not sure if we could have a more generalized option passing, > which would allow to pass any option (for its respective command) > to the command that is run in the update mode. wouldn't it be (theoretically) possible, in principle, to pass them via some config variable? e.g. instead of submodule update --reset-hard have -c submodule.update.reset.opts=--hard update --reset and then analogously -c submodule.update.merge.opts=--ff-only update --merge (--ff-only I guess would make no sense for any "supermodule" - a repo with submodules) > > Sure thing if all is clean etc, merge should result in fast-forward. I > > just do not want to miss a case where there was some (temporary?) "dirt" > > which I forgot to reset and it would then get merged etc. > maybe use --rebase, such that your potential change would bubble > up and possibly produce a merge conflict? that is a good idea as a workaround, thanks! -- Yaroslav O. Halchenko Center for Open Neuroscience http://centerforopenneuroscience.org Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik
