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-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LIST_MIRROR_RECEIVED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 891CF1F670 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 07:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232517AbiCAHJM (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2022 02:09:12 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38166 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231728AbiCAHJL (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2022 02:09:11 -0500 Received: from mail-vs1-xe2c.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7650C616A for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 23:08:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2c.google.com with SMTP id d26so15624041vsh.0 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 23:08:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZYcrCEGnFT7fVonbc67KMiZZ769zhdlbt6MgHFFngBw=; b=UTm7tllRtX5gq98pDf/u50+yV0WWAXgh+VoZQz5nRFEASINAwJZ5wwuVUGvu7R0rfP UVuE0GVHK4x5CGsTmL10ToiVWgfFoOIClTnxeOiDhKcqvEk0P8j8/KdUB9+q9SLHenLV 27RzqGHxfqZiCeLq81wWfLAJk9ik4tEVeEqAjoPT55J1JibPLTuYlAbzZ7M4pZYD61MI V52h1G/+wh819BBzyIkzJE1NdI4NVkuVBZkyTdduuSp3Fhg5stl+1ozcYRawaOR6RGjD CKgNEwh/pojYUG79QL8zWkAghSL/K0WrpWaLqny5AKtNkT+IA7/z6B5N05+tSzFxgazO v5CQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZYcrCEGnFT7fVonbc67KMiZZ769zhdlbt6MgHFFngBw=; b=a0wD3kXLMZZba9iUzlQ7+cywQ9dFNIgooT6aHvv64qoL3ZOM7BSb9FCtmYuseyV150 wvLfuy79JtfFFChKHDvRhvNHf/DMU3tJT5xLvqFqNUOfxFJNQEQn3JXG/q8S3zN2pPLk 1bXiw6hIZTl+qCIXaghdcxMLd3vpI7JuuHBI5zp8XRSBTW/TzjZtvW1uXg1p/4KoTBnz K8voFlA7R1e2Qexl+nYaTdRCYESsfsG9nRjFCqPVJZ54QOxkVuLEJK/1i/QHO1ogD3qQ /wfsptXBEcUyHkug/r5OTxcy5TvT5iz3wW8vbDBtuFe7Ql/r6WaUdtUd5HBrEIQRnwLR n55Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533xNoKWWln83eOaW0t2l4anUBGwtvtiJQ6t3k6hNsWLpHtbbRvV oUf/zdOPDJgFlizAbmWsdwDNzA7EiEL1uRdQE6I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJynopDeGy8gNn6hFUOMTORux0j5CpLU+p4OMMALNo2qdq8j8Kn7Kzx4Zn4nR0uLtSx5Nn3Izl0tD9tm68A0fwE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:3712:b0:31e:af66:6316 with SMTP id s18-20020a056102371200b0031eaf666316mr1209187vst.87.1646118510385; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 23:08:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220228215025.325904-1-jacob.e.keller@intel.com> <20220228215025.325904-3-jacob.e.keller@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jacob Keller Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 23:08:19 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] name-rev: use generation numbers if available To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jacob Keller , Git mailing list , Derrick Stolee Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 6:36 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jacob Keller writes: > > > +test_expect_success 'name-rev without commitGraph does not handle non-monotonic timestamps' ' > > + test_config -C non-monotonic core.commitGraph false && > > + ( > > + cd non-monotonic && > > + > > + rm -rf .git/info/commit-graph* && > > + > > + echo "main~3 undefined" >expect && > > + git name-rev --tags main~3 >actual && > > + > > + test_cmp expect actual > > + ) > > +' > > I doubt it is wise to "test" that a program does _not_ produce a > correct output, or even worse, it produces a particular wrong > output. This test, for example, casts in stone that any future > optimization that does not depend on the commit-graph is forever > prohibited. > > Just dropping the test would be fine, I would think. Stolee mentioned it. We could also convert it to a "test_expect_failure" with the expected output too... But that makes it look like something we'll fix