From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4B41F66F for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:52:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728601AbgKSPpB (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:45:01 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:35588 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728851AbgKSPpA (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:45:00 -0500 Received: (qmail 30921 invoked by uid 109); 19 Nov 2020 15:44:59 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:44:59 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 29131 invoked by uid 111); 19 Nov 2020 15:44:58 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:44:58 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:44:58 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= , git@vger.kernel.org, "brian m. carlson" , Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] t5310-pack-bitmaps: skip JGit tests with SHA256 Message-ID: <20201119154458.GA25426@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20201113215307.20855-1-szeder.dev@gmail.com> <20201118183022.GA8396@szeder.dev> <20201118184543.GA3016@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 12:19:10PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Yeah, it's likely we'll need to just match the output of "jgit > > --version". Since their support is hypothetical at this point, I think > > it makes sense to go with your original patch. It does mean we'll later > > have to remove the SHA1 prereq from those tests, but that's OK. It's not > > very many tests, and your commit message clearly explains what is going > > on. > > It's not just removing the SHA-1 prereq, but testing for a new-enough > version. > > This most likely entails adding a new test helper to `t/helper/` that > allows using `versioncmp()` via the command-line, with some clever way to > indicate the different outcomes, and then using that in a new prereq. > > You know, if it was me, I would opt for the simpler (and future-proof) > solution I presented above. But hey, if that complex solution using > `versioncmp()` floats your boat, who am I to stop you. But that was my (and Gábor's) point: it is not future proof, because we don't know whether it is a sufficient test until we actually see a version of JGit with the correct support. Not only that, but your proposed solution relies on having commits in the repository, which is not something that a prereq should be relying on. We may or may not need the version check eventually, but my point is that we should be punting on it until we know what is needed. -Peff