From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56D281F728 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:21:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751693AbcFXJVx (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2016 05:21:53 -0400 Received: from mail-qk0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:33864 "EHLO mail-qk0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751446AbcFXJVu (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2016 05:21:50 -0400 Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id t127so138863809qkf.1 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 02:21:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bTt/Tl7br/wTU9HeIm25nl6vxqrQBTz+Lh65c4U/UZM=; b=J/24x2TUbpIyGDEf1N8B3p1RMPxJZquoKAEi3WOFGloF8415n8Uq/mZC6CRU+IJflI +gf5IDdSYnM0gVxwAnLRqYfohIt9f+GIGjj5OREiH1J4Bbcn+Empw+1Dguxf55bOEkeB HS/aTOyKCmWhCq8ul8ayzLIZNFHGnN1iX4t4YBOck8SDx85/qsbP8cD0Lo+A+60z6NRK FYMc7WV5kJt1Opy37ulF6Wxrf8Yq2Y8POvIHlmOVUJf9UO8o7V5ZIOr2gWxsjcL4XKn/ 7ixeF3qocG5885QCUcZ0WZmcjBFOzyzD2urMYJGpAFLUQW9TG4JUpmmFm1OCHtRWKtcC wOgQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bTt/Tl7br/wTU9HeIm25nl6vxqrQBTz+Lh65c4U/UZM=; b=R06atdyK5OhOK9Q2yG/qaGNzyTDhjOsSAeXX9NLHJjtKQ1wmUu9veZkKcw68J0WrGu 01R4DDw4f++d7RIEPpVXqNESqglSdkhzhn1OSlC5Try7VPKH13RCvAeX/l0XZd46seXV rZGNIY2XnonufsFFXmYmrbzO1eYcguLzHm3rL6s4NZ94ip34BpEGrPDCd+9I6wEP2n0Y haI55Z8fAEj2A2bih4uqE23bCvBYP1RL9kMqkaUB8PXZj99hWp7oBXAQGi+2gLh7OENW wFT/HnT6firAS/IvYqbhlVeLQ4U0fboaIRoJhDYQDdcXmnizMjse9DqunmB3/4rreDEp cHtQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tI/OjaY9gyRNlaMsfdp4PcU8BW6Dmh6CMJcSNVOCOloJC2mUUwXjNEO7dq90h8eApril8x0fRPTKVKWuw== X-Received: by 10.55.165.4 with SMTP id o4mr3263372qke.15.1466760108967; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 02:21:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.55.123.6 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 02:21:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20160622165126.12786-1-mehul.jain2029@gmail.com> From: Mehul Jain Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 14:51:48 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Introduce log.showSignature config variable To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Git Mailing List , Eric Sunshine Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Mehul Jain writes: > >> In patch 2/3 and 3/3, there are many tests which requires a branch >> similar to that of "signed" branch, i.e. a branch with a commit having >> GPG signature. So previously in v2, I created two new branches, >> "test_sign" and "no_sign", which are identical to that of "signed" >> branch. And with these branches, I wrote the tests in patch 2/3 >> and 3/3. >> >> As suggested by Eric [1], rather than creating new branches, I >> can take advantage of "signed" branch which already exists. > > Yeah, I understand that part. But you do not _need_ to do the split > you do in 1/3 in order to reuse "signed". If it's fine, then I think it would be OK to drop this 1/3. Without splitting the 'log --graph --show-signature' in two test will also serve the purpose for the new test to use the signed branch. Should I send a new patch series with 1/3 dropped or you can do it manually at your end? Thanks, Mehul