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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham 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 B1CDC1F910 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2022 20:37:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.b="4PfQx41u"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230078AbiKAUhp (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Nov 2022 16:37:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38618 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229528AbiKAUho (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Nov 2022 16:37:44 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd36.google.com (mail-io1-xd36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d36]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2E981276C for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2022 13:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd36.google.com with SMTP id p141so13382547iod.6 for ; Tue, 01 Nov 2022 13:37:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OJHUugM3/jFvwUQKJp47Xxg9KYvidCFfldQTCiNKeWM=; b=4PfQx41uisMhBn5W9vBrf0wX/W2QFPF0gBmnUJH2WHHgVWa4YYT0eNl0ly79zeQk8C vCivq6LvDswEXKTShBn4esmA2mwbJJb4pZJLHZtM4CLxzVIWm6IlNyPlYdK5No4o9KMw 0YjPK9SalWUh9E4QhzMvjnNjuWZtN0vGtipm6FLpExkqPHN3RYQY4ckHPj21EMX3Towy WO29nb3j0V8vZm2QYB3N1UveaZ1mg3dMmJbH0daJLSw9Y34mQ0svXxhQWSAXvUVVMxQ1 hwb7UKrYurMKuUQydwM9o3oi30oBenvfAnfTHoNpOff1lqYxgTC6eo5MSUU6hUYWriQT yRFQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=OJHUugM3/jFvwUQKJp47Xxg9KYvidCFfldQTCiNKeWM=; b=q62V6vgnqNYsePE0M+FOole7we/dR8hCt+n3mh5d8oC7kOmPRXP/SxOp46oXhWUQ3x DBpkxuYJ1poF6L0leLFu3HcySSnCglYymSD4wCMVKEp7sXvMEYw4HCZmAZr9bi6g2QUk Xo16xE76zrkTVvRt1KphbxkRcwQuE+ArfVPvD3ZcdWylqmAdk4w2g9THF2YGDyybHWUK uUOW7/bhBWoa+dsB2qqD5YuYqNBzb3TaY8EsBngEoPzX7lzv0GnIBRLAfqy0SwgMIVCM KjSsphQIqOWijFlPiT55tWCV4cWejAP6xTfGKU1pfZ37lniNWFjaAG+NxeB2yNtepjjT ypkg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1MUCeWcLx7h8AQWf6hrkcz+QUW15m4y6pQ0snHQXoSx6QSPmwe wl5YZtpiEpLn58Ip8lpVLUQcOw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM5a70Ran1ubo2PYRO+brPGXiibsUi1T+DIIwCAyRNbIY9fqZg27igD9y/MdxT9F5+0lYQuBlw== X-Received: by 2002:a02:6619:0:b0:375:4395:4ad7 with SMTP id k25-20020a026619000000b0037543954ad7mr169262jac.108.1667335063253; Tue, 01 Nov 2022 13:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r23-20020a6b8f17000000b006884b050a0asm4238064iod.18.2022.11.01.13.37.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 01 Nov 2022 13:37:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2022 16:37:41 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Jeff King Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Derrick Stolee , Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] t5516: move plaintext-password tests from t5601 and t5516 Message-ID: References: <221101.865yfz5pjp.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 03:32:06AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > If we toss that out, then in theory that widens the options. And in some > ways it's nice to use git://, because it has fewer dependencies and so > is run on more platforms. But it strikes me as a pretty unrealistic > test, just because credentials in git:// URLs make no sense and are not > something anybody would do. > > As you note, since the error comes from remote.c, it would still > trigger. But it's a bit more "white box" testing than I think makes > sense here. I prefer the original tests' method of trying to create > plausible real-world scenarios and seeing how they behave (and I think > my patch even improves that, since having an actual server on the other > end is the usual case). Agreed. Despite some of the niceties you mention, I concur that testing http(s) is more realistic and worth doing. Thanks, Taylor