From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Bug report: Duplicate CRLF rewrite warnings on commit Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 14:12:55 -0400 Message-ID: <20160513181255.GA30700@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160513134953.GE2345@dinwoodie.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Adam Dinwoodie X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 13 20:13:08 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1b1HaD-000800-Ep for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 13 May 2016 20:13:05 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752407AbcEMSM7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 May 2016 14:12:59 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:39233 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751312AbcEMSM7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 May 2016 14:12:59 -0400 Received: (qmail 9453 invoked by uid 102); 13 May 2016 18:12:58 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 13 May 2016 14:12:58 -0400 Received: (qmail 20313 invoked by uid 107); 13 May 2016 18:12:58 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 13 May 2016 14:12:58 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 13 May 2016 14:12:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160513134953.GE2345@dinwoodie.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 02:49:53PM +0100, Adam Dinwoodie wrote: > (Tangentially: what's the accepted practice for submitting failing test > scripts? I've written a short test case to add to t0020 that shows this > bugged behaviour, but I've got the vague impression from past emails > that leading with the patch email adding the failing test case is not > the expected way to do things on this list...) We don't want commits that fail the test suite, since it makes bisection more difficult. But you can mark known bugs like: test_expect_failure 'git-foo should output bar' ' ... ' I think it's OK to submit a patch like that. Hopefully somebody picks that up and combines it with their fix patch, but if not, then it at least documents the failure for later generations. -Peff