On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 08:44:38PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > +# Similar to test_commit, but efficiently create <nr> commits, each with a > > +# unique number $n (from 1 to <nr> by default) in the commit message. > > Is it intentional not to follow test_commit's convention of creating a > tag as well? If so it would be helpful to note that difference here, or Yes, it was intentional. I have long hated that feature, as there are many tests have to bend over backwards to deal with the reachability implications of adding the extra tag (not to mention the waste of a process). Likewise, I have long hated the implicit-argument-ordering of test_commit that make it hard to set some optional arguments but not others (hence the double-dash parameters). I had planned to add a "--tag" parameter if anybody ever wanted one. But we can call out that difference explicitly. Or alternatively, stop saying "like test_commit" and just say "Efficiently create <nr> commits". > rather, move this documentation to t/README where test_commit and > friends are documented. Ugh. I had no idea that documentation even existed. Because of course test_commit _is_ documented next to its definition, and that documentation has been kept up to date, unlike the far-away stale bits in t/README. -Peff
