From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Sharness v1.0.0 Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:46:55 -0400 Message-ID: <20160614214655.GA22334@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160614213453.GA21560@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Christian Couder , git , Mathias Lafeldt , Alexander Sulfrian , Dennis Kaarsemaker , John Keeping , Konstantin Koroviev , "Mark A. Grondona" , Matthieu Moy , Maxim Bublis , Richard Hansen , Roman Neuhauser , Simon Chiang To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 14 23:47:18 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 1bCwAp-0004PX-6y for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 23:47:03 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751268AbcFNVq7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:46:59 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:54883 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750771AbcFNVq6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:46:58 -0400 Received: (qmail 15322 invoked by uid 102); 14 Jun 2016 21:46:58 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:46:58 -0400 Received: (qmail 641 invoked by uid 107); 14 Jun 2016 21:47:09 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:47:09 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:46:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 02:43:19PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > I don't think the Git project would ever want to say "sharness is the > > upstream, and we are now just a user of it". But I wonder if we could > > break down test-lib.sh to keep the Git-specific parts separate, which > > would make it easier for sharness to pull the other bits as a whole. > > I took a quick look around, and it seems that this is an outdated > fork made without getting much of the improvement from its upstream > since it forked. It does not seem to have lazy prerequisite, for > example. Yeah, I don't think it has kept up with our work. My statement above was "I don't think we'd _ever_ want to consider sharness the upstream, even if it were up to date", but obviously there would be a lot of work to even get it there. -Peff