From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA242034E for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 15:53:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754961AbcGTPx1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:53:27 -0400 Received: from siwi.pair.com ([209.68.5.199]:35871 "EHLO siwi.pair.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754930AbcGTPx0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:53:26 -0400 Received: from [10.160.15.137] (unknown [167.220.148.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by siwi.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8D498461A; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:53:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/6] Status and checkout unit tests for --porcelain[=] To: Johannes Schindelin , Jeff Hostetler References: <1468966258-11191-1-git-send-email-jeffhost@microsoft.com> <1468966258-11191-3-git-send-email-jeffhost@microsoft.com> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, gitster@pobox.com From: Jeff Hostetler Message-ID: <578F9DED.6010309@jeffhostetler.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:51:09 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 07/20/2016 11:19 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Jeff Hostetler wrote: > >> Simple unit tests to validate the argument parsing. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler > > They are simple alright, but do we really need so many of them? I would > like to keep the ones in t7060, but I do not think that we necessarily > have to add the t7501 ones. > > I know I am a bit at odds here with Junio, who frequently prefers more > tests. It's just that I have to run the complete test suite so often and > it does take 30-45 minutes to run here (due to the fact that the test > suite exercises quite a lot of the POSIX emulation layer via shell > scripting). > > So do not take my suggestions as the sole basis for deciding how to go > from here. I'm open to suggestion here. I mainly wanted to be able to prove that adding "=1" didn't affect the output and that an invalid parameter throws. We could eliminate several of the "more trivial" ones if that would help. Jeff