From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
"Johannes Sixt" <j6t@kdbg.org>,
"John Keeping" <john@keeping.me.uk>,
"Pratik Karki" <predatoramigo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rebase tests: test linear branch topology
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 10:46:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq7edrr79m.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190222145344.GA5090@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:53:44 -0500")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>> While I'm at it add a --fork-point test, strictly speaking this is
>> redundant to the existing '' test, as no argument to rebase implies
>> --fork-point. But now it's easier to grep for tests that explicitly
>> stress --fork-point.
>
> That makes sense.
>
>> +test_expect_success 'setup branches and remote tracking' '
>> + git tag -l >tags &&
>> + for tag in $(cat tags)
>> + do
>> + git branch branch-$tag $tag || return 1
>> + done &&
>
> I don't think we need this extra tmpfile and cat, do we? I.e.,
>
> for tag in $(git tag -l)
>
> would work.
I think it is being (overly) defensive not to lose the exit status
of "git tag".
> We should probably avoid depending on the exact output of
> the porcelain "tag", though. Maybe:
>
> git for-each-ref \
> --format='create refs/heads/branch-%(refname:strip=2) %(objectname)' \
> refs/tags |
> git update-ref --stdin
>
> which has the added bonus of using a constant number of processes.
Much better ;-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-22 18:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-14 13:23 BUG: 2.11-era rebase regression when @{upstream} is implicitly used Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-02-21 14:10 ` Jeff King
2019-02-21 14:50 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-02-21 15:10 ` Jeff King
2019-02-21 21:40 ` [PATCH 0/2] rebase: fix 2.11.0-era --fork-point regression Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-02-21 21:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] rebase tests: test linear branch topology Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-02-22 14:53 ` Jeff King
2019-02-22 18:46 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2019-02-21 21:40 ` [PATCH 2/2] rebase: don't rebase linear topology with --fork-point Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-02-22 15:08 ` Jeff King
2019-02-22 16:49 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-02-24 10:10 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq7edrr79m.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
--cc=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=predatoramigo@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).