Hi, > > 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? The s/!/test_must_fail/ is just an "extra" like "Hey, you're currently standing, can you bring me some tea?" In this case: "Oh, I'm currently adding some tests, so I can s/!/test_must_fail/" > I think your subject line and the message is worse than your > previous one. You are saying *HOW* you changed it, Not exactly. In the previous one I said, what my patch does: improve t3404. The latter one said it, too, but a little more specific. > without saying *WHY* nor *WHAT FOR*. That's right. The s/!/test_must_fail/ is, as I said, just an "extra". And one that does no harm at all. The others are tests that were useful during git sequencer prototype development, because once a test in the middle of the test suite failed because the branch was not correctly reset in one of the invocations of rebase-i in the first tests. Well, but I wonder if a long explanation is always necessary. It is on feature patches and bugfix patches. But here? Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@xxxxxxx>, PGP 0x6EDDD207FCC5040F -- 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
