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=1.7 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 D1B701F670 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 07:09:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232777AbiCAHKC (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2022 02:10:02 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42106 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231728AbiCAHKB (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2022 02:10:01 -0500 Received: from mail-vk1-xa35.google.com (mail-vk1-xa35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a35]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15A7D37A1A for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 23:09:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vk1-xa35.google.com with SMTP id l10so6403302vki.9 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 23:09:21 -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=Raos3jM0+dqgNXil3EEHBQteqsztJDfH4kXARktafBw=; b=POoSKT8uh4fXM9rREr8qzH1prR+6dOJoUIchrbNBrsgxAo/xewvX51oHbR0qRl7PKD KghENJ/H2Z/bnuLnnJMaptXDsh4OHDJiaKQWykd/3tYquNEXK9VHdCh7XqhVwljSQ+5R P/a1TRj3rWiixYhp2izULxOCax2hrHK7gLW7Hbrq2z4saBcHTMH72g4oExPvSZZUl3Oi Jg6cxheU5OdJb39YugrlWBLyQX1p4+5aYJ6T1AntKbgpfO0xAaZ+lK+a1RDuVRUKu82H 5lu2/Tcu+/tjvHkZwiy0crZZZTFNLrHrApGjUykxyGJWbRm4KKnFOelSUYD4rgOtBrO5 c4cA== 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=Raos3jM0+dqgNXil3EEHBQteqsztJDfH4kXARktafBw=; b=joYosoV4Y30pUe3jVRMjoGAek+p8XUOazX9vdMhsTtTgDdhD1c9Ao2qbYgwnn5WLmD Qb13yhLbIXA3WogW8bTMWfYgL/+0aOjVCbdWVL3ODtT0ot85cNrsmF5FBCHY3fYVY6e7 CnJraEOMOkDF4Xe8IFbRntre+jJBy04yMtB6I5QqMOPP+Tn+dcEwfZ4qerlu3u/w1TWg jlJ1IUGRBUT/m6wOoCd1+KrrlibdP4E+/ZBQCCCFJ0NljTkS217EUl3SZ14gziPqUx8M +G9m4InkR7aTdM119nlsyG5KF8EUSYM0vY1cuSE2n2uo0tp065mExtbQLyGomjZ6DKxH kP7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532AA0PqRdcWTfsX23k2K8Df82COditWw7eYkPCgmZnqiXqdF1C2 ++8hyu2XPRmx4X/mOie+jexqNtGucvx9dSpEgeU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxo2eH55t8cSastr00drGEGT5TWLx4SL678tEWcKmyPYYcC3VxmvZtHWaNjw73k6WwCO0U/40vSrP4ALLXjf1s= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:88a:b0:332:6860:7b1f with SMTP id 10-20020a056122088a00b0033268607b1fmr9781402vkf.25.1646118560197; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 23:09:20 -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 23:09:09 -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 11:08 PM Jacob Keller wrote: > > 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 I'm happy to drop this test though Thanks, Jake