Hi Junio, On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 5:09 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Shuqi Liang <cheskaqiqi@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > * 'on all' in the title of the test 'write-tree on all' was unclear; > > remove it. > > > > * Add a baseline 'test_all_match git write-tree' before making any > > changes to the index, providing a reference point for the 'write-tree' > > prior to any modifications. > > > > * Add a comparison of the output of 'git status --porcelain=v2' to test > > the working tree after 'write-tree' exits. > > > > * Ensure SKIP_WORKTREE files weren't materialized on disk by using > > "test_path_is_missing". > > > > Signed-off-by: Shuqi Liang <cheskaqiqi@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > As we have lost the change to the code, the title has become stale. > How about I retitle it like so after queuing the patch? > > Subject: t1092: update write-tree test I think it's a good idea to retitle the patch， as it better reflects the current changes in the test. > The changes to the test seem to match what Victoria already gave a > thums-up in her review of v4; I see nothing surprising or unexpected > there. > > Thanks. Will queue. I really appreciate your and Victoria's continuous support and guidance throughout the review process :) Thanks! Shuqi
