Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@xxxxxxx> writes: >> > 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?" Counting the places that were affected, I would not call which one is primary change and which one is extra. The later half of your patch is all about test_must_fail isn't it? I am all for making tests more careful, and I think more use of test_must_fail makes quite a lot of sense. Please don't do a half-ass job if you are doing the conversion anyway. About the commit log message, I tend to agree that your original subject looked ugly and it would have been nicer to just say "t3404: more strict tests for git-rebase" or something like that, but probably an empty commit message body would have been Ok. -- 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
