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-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D2A01F4B4 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:37:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2410434AbgJPQhx (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:37:53 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:60570 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2408856AbgJPQhx (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:37:53 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FD3F91424; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:37:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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=f4i7TUaqr/zwIpVRztai5N4cMlw=; b=GSTsNG SFsmBlVypao2DJ4nBUyoO9Jp6TR+un2wSW6eWA5nkNp0Mdh42L0+hurTKMQsl0WR FexjPiaTu2JUlS+IsFQpVx4fT43mP2CRhCpGf3RgoiW3Bc0pOyJ5CmaX/mpLoDeD SwLWekzp2X8mrk29MIe4PUnCdYVQYjN9VsWcc= 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=GySWAqJIq0/pvlWdeUiXYFzSxoIoJWc6 EXcwHnZf9MvdkRw2BZHQCMkm+t8FBu/ZZvf7AC0R7kUj4aqZjLjYLyVG65wp021h 2uIpNEVBfROCx0YlPMK8clHNVuubBBVIfMb05ZwBDmzEQXzn/XDp7scU03dj2VDY FR6uhMdXcYQ= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1766991423; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:37:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (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 933E191422; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:37:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Phillip Wood Cc: Samuel =?utf-8?Q?=C4=8Cavoj?= , git@vger.kernel.org, "brian m. carlson" , Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sequencer: fix gpg option passed to merge subcommand References: <20201012234901.1356948-1-samuel@cavoj.net> <31ce457b-e71c-0ca0-e5be-a9aebb9cf785@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 09:37:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: <31ce457b-e71c-0ca0-e5be-a9aebb9cf785@gmail.com> (Phillip Wood's message of "Fri, 16 Oct 2020 14:40:00 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: EEEDF0A4-0FCD-11EB-B973-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Phillip Wood writes: > ... Reviewers that only read the patch without loading up the > test file in their editor have no indication that the test should be > clearing the config variable. It is not a review if the code being updated is not checked for sanity in its own context, is it?