Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 04:16:49PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh >> index 9001ed3a64..12fe82f660 100644 >> --- a/t/test-lib.sh >> +++ b/t/test-lib.sh >> @@ -1862,6 +1862,11 @@ test_lazy_prereq CURL ' >> curl --version >> ' >> >> +test_lazy_prereq WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES ' >> + test -n "$WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES" >> +' >> + >> +# DEPRECATED; DO NOT USE THIS IN NEW TESTS >> test_lazy_prereq WITHOUT_BREAKING_CHANGES ' >> test -z "$WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES" >> ' > > Do we maybe want to state that this can be removed once the next release > cycle is over? Perhaps. As 'seen' is pretty-much closed at this point and there is nothing in flight that uses WITHOUT_ variant in there, v2 of this series can just do without it, which may be simpler. > I find it to be a bit more actionable when stating hard > dates after which something can be dropped True, that is a good strategy for a transition that takes longer time.
