From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] t1300: document some aesthetic failures of the config editor Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:21:39 -0400 Message-ID: <20130330002139.GA32353@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20130329170032.GA3552@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87ip4ayvfn.fsf@linux-k42r.v.cablecom.net> <20130329172307.GA11099@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130329175058.GA13506@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vobe2nins.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20130329195155.GA19994@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vvc8alzat.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Rast , Phil Haack To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Mar 30 01:22:12 2013 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 1ULjYh-0000Vk-JV for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:22:11 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757365Ab3C3AVm (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:21:42 -0400 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:48698 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757352Ab3C3AVm (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:21:42 -0400 Received: (qmail 11818 invoked by uid 107); 30 Mar 2013 00:23:29 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:23:29 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:21:39 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vvc8alzat.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:35:22PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > Here it is with the updated expectation. I don't care _that_ much, so if > > you feel strongly and want to drop the first test, feel free. > > As long as we are adding expect_failure without an immediate fix, > let's document the ideal, with this patch on top. > [...] > test_expect_failure 'unsetting the last key in a section removes header' ' > cat >.git/config <<-\EOF && > + # some generic comment on the configuration file itself > + # a comment specific to this "section" section. > [section] > # some intervening lines > # that should also be dropped > > key = value > EOF > > - >expect && > + cat >expect <<-\EOF && > + # some generic comment on the configuration file itself > + EOF I think we may not attain that ideal without some natural language processing of the comments. But hey, no reason not to shoot for the stars. :) -Peff