Quoting Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@xxxxxxx>: > Hi, > >> > @@ -380,7 +397,7 @@ test_expect_success 'interrupted squash works as expected' ' >> > ! FAKE_LINES="1 squash 3 2" git rebase -i HEAD~3 && >> >> These can be converted to use test_must_fail by using a sub-shell >> as Junio demonstrated: >> >> ( >> FAKE_LINES="1 squash 3 2" && >> export FAKE_LINES && >> test_must_fail git rebase -i HEAD~3 >> ) && > > Perhaps I'm not consequent, but I thought that it's not worth it ;-) Doesn't that logic make the other s/!/test_must_fail/ changes also not worth it? What is the reason behind the change? I think your subject line and the message is worse than your previous one. You are saying *HOW* you changed it, without saying *WHY* nor *WHAT FOR*. I may have written your log message like this: Subject: t3404: tighten git-rebase tests In preparation for rewriting git-rebase in C, replace the way a failure is currently detected with "! git" to use test_must_fail so that we do not confuse a broken rebase that dumps core with a correctly failing one. although I do not know if you are rewriting git-rebase in C (^_^). The point I learned from this project is to say why it is done that way, not how you did it. The latter can be seen in the diff. -- Nanako Shiraishi http://ivory.ap.teacup.com/nanako3/ -- 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
