From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 10/11] branch.c: use 'ref-filter' APIs Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:56:27 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1438067468-6835-1-git-send-email-Karthik.188@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Git , Christian Couder , Junio C Hamano To: Karthik Nayak X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 29 17:56:43 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZKTik-000575-0v for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:56:42 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752833AbbG2P4g (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:56:36 -0400 Received: from mx1.imag.fr ([129.88.30.5]:56256 "EHLO shiva.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751291AbbG2P4f (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:56:35 -0400 Received: from clopinette.imag.fr (clopinette.imag.fr [129.88.34.215]) by shiva.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t6TFuPSl010477 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:56:25 +0200 Received: from anie.imag.fr (anie.imag.fr [129.88.7.32]) by clopinette.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t6TFuRA4021031; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:56:27 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Karthik Nayak's message of "Wed, 29 Jul 2015 21:07:43 +0530") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (shiva.imag.fr [129.88.30.5]); Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:56:25 +0200 (CEST) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-MailScanner-ID: t6TFuPSl010477 X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1438790189.68923@SJ/UAAWL9qLSvX9jyfHAyQ Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Karthik Nayak writes: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Matthieu Moy > wrote: >> >> I'm not sure what's the convention, but I think the test description >> should give the expected behavior even with test_expect_failure. >> >> And please help the reviewers by saying what's the status wrt this test >> (any plan on how to fix it?). >> > > On the other hand I wonder if the test is even needed as, we don't > really need it > Cause we remove that ability of branch.c by using filter_refs(). Please read d0f810f (refs.c: allow listing and deleting badly named refs, 2014-09-03). I think the reasoning makes sense, and we should keep this ability. -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/