On Wed, Apr 17, 2024, at 09:11, Dragan Simic wrote: >> I had the same question but left it unwritten since I noticed that >> this new test is modelled after the test immediately following it in >> the script, and the existing test also redirects to "patch" >> unnecessarily. So, if it's done this way for consistency with existing >> tests, I don't mind letting it slide. > > Yes, I also wasn't super happy with this new test, as I already noted > in one of my replies, but improving this and the other similar tests > is most probably something best left for a follow-up series. I don’t see the point in writing the test in mimic-neighbors way only to improve it shortly after. If the test can be written in a better way then the other tests can be improved later. Or now. I think I’ve seen other discussions were a less good pattern wasn’t accepted in new tests even though they were used in existing ones. The reviewer then pointed out that the other tests should be updated later. That’s just my opinion and recollection. -- Kristoffer Haugsbakk
