"brian m. carlson" <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 2020-05-28 at 15:54:49, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> "brian m. carlson" <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > Yes, that is what I meant. I'm glad to know my question has been >> > answered and things work. I'm okay with the patch as it is in that >> > case, although I'd give bonus points for mentioning that this syntax >> > doesn't regress bash. >> >> True. And we would want to also have tested-by on more recent >> versions of bash, no? > > Sure, such testing would be welcome, but I believe those are tested with > our tests on most platforms. macOS is special because it uses the last > GPLv2 version of bash, which is less capable in some ways. I assumed > that bash would not be more likely to break here in newer versions, but > perhaps I shouldn't make that assumption. In any case, a few integration into 'pu' with the patch have been already made e.g. https://travis-ci.org/github/git/git/builds/692290894 so we should be good ;-)
