Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > At 2008-07-06 14:54:44 +0200, Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx wrote: >> >> AFAICS the previous version is in 'next' already: >> 656b50345239293929ad8c639c5f1941c6b867ad > > Oh, I see, thanks. I misunderstood the request. Here's a separate patch > to just add the test. Oh, there is no misunderstanding. You couldn't have possibly known if the main body of the patch will go to 'next' or just be dropped when I said "you might also want to have tests" to you. > +test_expect_success 'stash apply' ' > + echo foo > file && > + git commit file -m first > + echo bar > file && > + git stash && > + echo baz > file && > + git commit file -m second && > + git stash branch stashbranch && > + git commit file -m alternate\ second && > + git diff master..stashbranch > output && > + test_cmp output expect && > + test 0 = $(git stash list | wc -l) > +' The title is probably not 'stash apply' but 'stash branch'. Don't you want to also validate that: - "stash branch" command switched to the new branch "stashbranch"? - before making "alternate second", the index and the working tree have expected contents? and - the final shape of the history looks correctly forked (i.e. "stashbranch" branches at the commit before "-m second" commit was made)? > test_done > -- > 1.5.6 -- 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
