Hi
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024, at 16:41, David Disseldorp wrote:
> 90bc19b3ae ("notes.c: introduce '--separator=<paragraph-break>' option")
> changed note_data.given logic such that it's no longer set if a zero
> length file or blob object is provided.
This project uses the `git show -s --pretty=reference` format:
90bc19b3ae (notes.c: introduce '--separator=<paragraph-break>'
option, 2023-05-27)
> t/t3301-notes.sh | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/t/t3301-notes.sh b/t/t3301-notes.sh
> index 536bd11ff4..c0dbacc161 100755
> --- a/t/t3301-notes.sh
> +++ b/t/t3301-notes.sh
> @@ -1557,4 +1557,9 @@ test_expect_success 'empty notes are displayed by
> git log' '
> test_cmp expect actual
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'empty notes do not invoke the editor' '
> + test_commit 18th &&
> + GIT_EDITOR="false" git notes add -C "$empty_blob" --allow-empty
> +'
> +
> test_done
> --
> 2.43.0
This test fails, obviously. Maybe you can reorder the patches so that
both two patches pass the test suite?
Introducing a regression test in one patch and then fixing the bug (and
making the test pass) in the next patch is a style that some prefer. But
I have received feedback before that it’s best to avoid that.
--
Kristoffer Haugsbakk
