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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C8A1F461 for ; Wed, 15 May 2019 02:58:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726319AbfEOC6F (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2019 22:58:05 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:65422 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726211AbfEOC6F (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2019 22:58:05 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BFFE1436E0; Tue, 14 May 2019 22:58:03 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=KJvk7SHaHMwq/CN7Eb3m65trf9E=; b=CjW65i 4tVijPNk8T7FjTR2n8EgQimPn6DQrjaAxGKEsj8fV2wvGk+53VgFvwJ1fvfwbYau IGezhTRfx1lvA67C4q1+fRWyU1gXcbvBek3cJmjsuzKjOf+l9Pr2R4uslP4kE3OH c4F7WITZGPxPaKAdo4ex3VvUhJWY6j1K1H/cc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=MGD6P3XDsbEGR0dWcZoAR+qQks67ps6J fhzvJPlrYYtkBc9hjjiM4anRakv6KxR7DsTpYHzewqsTG+A7EV1p0T/++8FA8AE3 sbkelVYwLDO2TWNBQp4oBMCVQ/lzRLP6jxQBInwheWgwleHw+zpPWLiyusQShx5v CVQUuPEtAAo= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 238621436DF; Tue, 14 May 2019 22:58:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.255.141]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F1D51436DC; Tue, 14 May 2019 22:58:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] merge: add --quit References: <20190509101028.24656-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <20190514091322.12427-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <20190514091322.12427-3-pclouds@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 11:58:01 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 14 May 2019 15:44:26 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 412F061A-76BD-11E9-8EEA-46F8B7964D18-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: >> +test_expect_success 'merge --quit' ' >> + git reset --hard c2 && >> + test_must_fail git -c rerere.enabled=true merge master && > > This makes me really worried. It is the same `master` (i.e. *not* a tag) > that broke this test case in the previous round. I'll let you two figure this out, but I tend to agree. >> + test_path_is_file .git/MERGE_HEAD && >> + test_path_is_file .git/MERGE_MODE && >> + test_path_is_file .git/MERGE_MSG && >> + test_path_is_file .git/MERGE_RR && > > Isn't this a clear implementation details of `git rerere` that you just > taught `git merge`'s regression test? > ... > It would probably make a ton more sense to look at the output of `git > rerere status` instead. While I understand your concern, it is not the business of this test to detect a bug in "git rerere status", either. The safest thing to do would be to test both ;-) t4151 that tests "am --abort" already looks at MERGE_RR for the same "we want to make sure that the rerere state is cleared" purpose, so I'd not be worried too much about this particular test. Thanks.