On 25/01/2008, Karl Hasselström <kha@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2008-01-24 22:55:17 -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > > If "stg push" fails, the subsequent "stg clean" will remove the > > patch that could not been applied. I think it's wrong. > > I agree. It's consistent -- a conflicting patch is empty -- but > clearly the wrong thing to do from a usability perspective. Got broken by commit fe1cee2e49d9995852ba92d8fba1d064acf2fca9 which removes the check_conflicts() call. As I said in a different post, we should add these back (and to the 'goto' command as well) to make StGIT safer. > > I've made a patch for the testsuite that should pass once the bug is > > fixed. Try removing "stg clean" from the test. and it will pass. But > > "stg clean" should make no difference here. > > Good! > > For known-to-be-failing tests, you can use test_expect_failure. I'll > amend your patch to do that when I pick it up (if Catalin doesn't beat > me to it). Probably not, I'm really busy for one more week with a Linux kernel release. -- Catalin - 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
