Glen Choo <chooglen@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> +test_expect_success 'should create branches if branch exists and --force is given' ' > >> + test_when_finished "cleanup_branches super branch-a" && > >> + ( > >> + cd super && > >> + git -C sub rev-parse HEAD >expected && > >> + test_commit -C sub baz && > >> + git -C sub branch branch-a HEAD~1 && > >> + git branch --recurse-submodules --force branch-a && > >> + git rev-parse branch-a && > >> + # assert that sub:branch-a was moved > >> + git -C sub rev-parse branch-a >actual && > >> + test_cmp expected actual > >> + ) > >> +' > > > > Should we create branch-a at HEAD instead of HEAD~1? > > If we create branch-a at HEAD, we won't be testing that --force moves > the branch head. Walking through the lines of the test: > >> + git -C sub rev-parse HEAD >expected && So "expected" is sub's HEAD at the start of the test. Let's call this old-head. > >> + test_commit -C sub baz && We create a new commit on top, whose parent is old-head. Let's call this new-head. > >> + git -C sub branch branch-a HEAD~1 && We create a new branch at HEAD~1, which is new-head's parent, which is old-head. So this branch points to the same thing as "expected". > >> + git branch --recurse-submodules --force branch-a && When creating new branches with "--force", any branch information in the submodule is ignored. So we would expect "branch-a" in sub to be overridden from "old-head" to "old-head". > >> + git rev-parse branch-a && Verifying that branch-a exists, although upon second look, this would work whether or not we recursed, so maybe this line can be deleted. > >> + # assert that sub:branch-a was moved > >> + git -C sub rev-parse branch-a >actual && > >> + test_cmp expected actual A check, as expected. Unless I missed something, branch-a was never moved - it was created at "old-head" and then the "branch --force" is supposed to create it at "old-head" anyway. It would make more sense to me if the branch was created at "new-head", and then "branch --force" moved it to "old-head". > This means that the test might pass if we simply ignore > any existing branch-a - which is not the intended behavior of --force, > but this is behavior that we might want in the future (probably using > another option). By "ignore", supposing that there is an existing branch-a, do you mean overwrite branch-a, or not create any branch at all?
