From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>,
"git\@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2016, #03; Tue, 11)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:03:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq7f96ykkc.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1610151020480.197091@virtualbox> (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Sun, 16 Oct 2016 10:31:45 +0200 (CEST)")
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>> I'll mark it as "wait for follow-up fix" in whats-cooking.txt (on
>> 'todo' branch) to remind myself not to merge it yet.
>
> May I request your guidance as to your preference how to proceed?
> ...
I guess I didn't see this before I sent my response to the review
thread, which was in my pile of "these need more thought than others
before responding" topics.
> Here are the options I see:
>
> A) remove the tests in question
>
> B) mark them as !MINGW instead
>
> C) change just those two tests from using `$PWD` (pseudo-Unix path) to
> `$(pwd)` (native path)
>
> I would like to hear your feedback about your preference, but not without
> priming you a little bit by detailing my current opinion on the matter:
>
> While I think B) would be the easiest to read, C) would document the
> expected behavior better. A) would feel to me like shrugging, i.e. the
> lazy, wrong thing to do.
>
> What do you think?
As to my preference on tests, I guess what I suggested was a cross
between your B and C below, and I can go with either one as an
abbreviated version of my preference ;-)
I am still wondering if the test is expecting the right behaviour,
though. If some codepaths rely on a question "please resolve '../.'
relative to 'path/to/dir/.'" being answered as "that's path/to/dir
itself", it smells to me that the downstream of the dataflow that
expects such an answer, as well as the machinery that produces such
an answer, are acting as two wrongs that happen to cancel each
other. Am I grossly misunderstanding what that test is doing?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-17 17:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-11 21:06 What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2016, #03; Tue, 11) Junio C Hamano
2016-10-11 21:39 ` Stefan Beller
2016-10-11 21:39 ` Stefan Beller
2016-10-11 21:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-10-13 12:40 ` Johannes Schindelin
2016-10-14 16:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-10-16 8:31 ` Johannes Schindelin
2016-10-17 17:03 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2016-10-18 11:33 ` Johannes Schindelin
2016-10-18 13:35 ` Santiago Torres
2016-10-18 15:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19 9:23 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq7f96ykkc.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).