On Tue, Apr 05 2022, brian m. carlson wrote: >> This test has an implicit dependency on your earlier test and will break >> if it's not defining stash0, e.g. if you use --run=N or use other skip >> test features of test-lib.sh. >> >> Just factor that into a setup function & have the rest call it? > > Yes, most of our tests have that problem. I don't think it's worth > changing the way we do things unless we plan to make a concerted effort > to do that across the codebase and verify that in CI. > > If we really want to make that change across the codebase for the > future, that's fine, but I haven't seen such a discussion on the list so > far. Fair enough. I do think it's a good pattern when adding /new/ code to follow that practice, even if it requires the first added test to have a "git reset --hard" (in liue of fixing various tests above). But not enough to quibbly about it here :) Thanks.
