Re: [PATCH 2/4] t6038: fix test with obviously incorrect expectations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



"Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> From: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> t6038.11, 'cherry-pick patch from after text=auto' was set up so that on
> a branch with no .gitattributes file, you cherry-picked a patch from a
> branch that had a .gitattributes file (containing '* text=auto').
> Further, the two branches had a file which differed only in line
> endings.  In this situation, correct behavior is not well defined:
> should the .gitattributes file affect the merge or not?

I'd say that it is probably more intuitive to expect whatever
attributes set on the currently checked out and receiving the
cherry-picked change would take effect, but I do agree with you that
this is not well defined.  I think "changing attributes in the
middle may produce unexpected/undefined results---validate it when
you cross such a boundary" is a prudent advice we should give to the
users.

Would it make more sense not to test ill defined behaviour at all
instead, I wonder?

Thanks.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux