From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Improvements for t/README Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 03:28:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20100702072803.GB1812@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1278015478-6920-1-git-send-email-avarab@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jul 02 09:28:18 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OUafZ-0000EI-EL for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 09:28:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756172Ab0GBH2I convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jul 2010 03:28:08 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:41430 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754866Ab0GBH2G (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jul 2010 03:28:06 -0400 Received: (qmail 18357 invoked by uid 107); 2 Jul 2010 07:29:00 -0000 Received: from ip98-166-72-212.hr.hr.cox.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (98.166.72.212) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 03:29:00 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 02 Jul 2010 03:28:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1278015478-6920-1-git-send-email-avarab@gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 08:17:50PM +0000, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 = Bjarmason wrote: > This is v2 of the t/README series. It should address the concerns > Junio and Jeff had about it. >=20 > Jeff: >=20 > - Keep the ./ way of running tests, but elaborate a bit in the > commit message >=20 > - Mention --root's effects on the trash directory location Thanks. On the first point, I agree with Junio that dropping patch 1 is probably the best thing. For the second, your changes to patch 2 look good to me. The rest look OK from my cursory read. I like the "do's and don'ts" list, which is a good way of communicating the little bits of wisdom (btw, I saw your post a few weeks ago about shell portability in git, and I think a list of known-bad constructs would be a good idea. Making a list from our previous fixes is on my todo list, but I haven't actually started on it. :) ). One nit: > + You can gleam some further possible issues from the TAP grammar > + (see http://search.cpan.org/perldoc?TAP::Parser::Grammar#TAP_Gram= mar) > + but the best indication is to just run the tests with prove(1), > + it'll complain if anything is amiss. I think you mean "glean". -Peff