"Jeff Hostetler via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> From: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> fixup! t7527: test status with untracked-cache and fsmonitor--daemon
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> t/t7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh b/t/t7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh
> index 026382a0d86..f60e211dbab 100755
> --- a/t/t7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh
> +++ b/t/t7527-builtin-fsmonitor.sh
> @@ -536,9 +536,9 @@ matrix_clean_up_repo () {
> }
>
> matrix_try () {
> - uc=$1
> - fsm=$2
> - fn=$3
> + uc=$1 &&
> + fsm=$2 &&
> + fn=$3 &&
After seeing up to this step, I am reasonably well convinced that
what we want is to kick the jh/builtin-fsmonitor-part2 topic back to
'seen', and you send instead of part2.5 an updated part2, with
range-diff since the last round and this final iteration. A change
like the above will be seen in the range-diff in the cover letter
and most of them, like the above, will become trivial improvements,
and then the result can hopefully be placed back in 'next' reasonably
fast.
Opinions?
