Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Is this "doesn't" (documenting current behaviour, without saying if > it is wrong or is desired) or "shouldn't" (documenting the desired > behaviour, which the current implementation may or may not satisfy)? The current behaviour is okay and this commit adds the test case for it. So, in that sense, I think "shouldn't" is better word. > That's mouthful. Sorry if the test name is very long. But, I couldn't think of shorter test name than this - to explain what the test case is. > Lose SP after '>'. > > git -C partial.git log --follow -- new-file.txt >"$(pwd)/trace.txt" && Okay. > Looking at the implementation of the helper, it seems to be prepared > to handle negation itself. Shouldn't this be > > test_subcommand_inexact ! fetch <trace.txt > > instead? Oops, completely missed it. Correcting it :) > Why can't you specify what should NOT come before "fetch" in your > use of this helper? Below is the event triggered for non-exact OID rename - git -c fetch.negotiationAlgorithm=noop fetch origin --no-tags --no-write-fetch-head --recurse-submodules=no --filter=blob:none --stdin Derrick told me to not depend on other flags like `-c fetch.negotiationAlgorithm` etc. as they might be changed or omitted and as it makes sense to me also. That's why I didn't specify those things. > I wonder if it was more like this that the original wanted to grep for: > > grep '"event":"child_start".*\["git","pack-objects",.*\]' I don't know about other cases, but in my case, atleast I really wanted it. So, In this scenerio, should I stick with `test_subcommand_inexact` or I have to see other helper functions (or make my own) for it?
