Wincent Colaiuta <win@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I didn't add similar tests for the pre-commit hook because I don't
> think that's an interesting code path; we don't care about the commit
> message in that case, only whether the commit is allowed to proceed or
> not.
Sensible.
> +# set up fake editor for interactive editing
> +cat > fake-editor <<'EOF'
> +#!/bin/sh
> +cp FAKE_MSG "$1"
> +exit 0
> +EOF
> +chmod +x fake-editor
> +FAKE_EDITOR="$(pwd)/fake-editor"
> +export FAKE_EDITOR
Hmm. Why "export"?
> +test_expect_success "with no hook (editor)" \
> + "echo 'more foo' >> file &&
> + git add file &&
> + echo 'more foo' > FAKE_MSG &&
> + GIT_EDITOR="$FAKE_EDITOR" git commit"
> +
I initially was going to say "this is just a style thing", but I really
want our tests to read uniformly like this:
test_expect_success 'without hook (editor)' '
echo more foo >>file &&
git add file &&
echo more foo >FAKE_MSG &&
GIT_EDITOR="$FAKE_EDITOR" git commit
'
* Use single quotes around test unless there is a compelling reason not
to;
* The opening single quote of the test body on the same line as
expect-success; the end quote at column 1 on a line on its own.
Notice a bug in your version? Dq around $FAKE_EDITOR is stripped away
and it is harder to spot it because the script does not follow that
style.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
