From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCC6DC433FE for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2022 12:46:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229894AbiDFMsW (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Apr 2022 08:48:22 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34080 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229920AbiDFMrx (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Apr 2022 08:47:53 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62a.google.com (mail-ej1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB40D44DCCC for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2022 02:01:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id l26so2904638ejx.1 for ; Wed, 06 Apr 2022 02:01:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version; bh=0lSYEp7e8yk2vVIuqOb7Imf/CaGiah/CFb95oBf7NH8=; b=Bqwv7vOH0es2J6e75tWjVBStuboKcQP/rPibWSApIAIrIz/e7+Yz0TunoJ/orH/bew k13x1kXORUcQ1g2btFbD4VmOnvmfo5elM9xeujKfiZVG7yntpQ5nnEquUvT83cIhvvgi XZ1TTfIWRXxzcHkXXXj+BMYrvxpwQGOsAjyoN/Z2I5KPg/akGNRIFbpHaLMuUSdkL8OC xCZO+GusEKgNSw1B9GPYZXIRyYs8j+jv27bKxlYenedVNEa/bNliLVOE4pI80ej/h6hz y+i2NaRHGqkEn4Uw6d4mVcRZl095D4d92k9JIbYX6fqI0fPEvNF0ZRMaeif/1Eyh61PD RpKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version; bh=0lSYEp7e8yk2vVIuqOb7Imf/CaGiah/CFb95oBf7NH8=; b=dvfzSCUvI4pL4EhTUnTl54MkDuEEym/ONriQdh5irn45LW1deIsaK9Aro16keTqHwC pMBVsYxvLo5LyHzWlfdHFZyYXJ85lYaHH8q+JwhkpwAw20vQPpHsWBd0KU/aKFFsA1f2 D7uarpyF2HbmwCNywV2AB1s8RP2EDa7lI9DxLvcwQ5xh1VAxMR/fMpZkfGF6Bbt3agua x/CatttGN2JLZVatako547Dbskckj/Ilj+v0eE5IjH7ksq6ayQ7iXJEu+NL1VNdseYdu JqnLJIuMyvBAMdhokaai5hldMaHB5mZarCsn7TrS/Grp38MGat6Ek59MKRfCa1d5QPp9 wJPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531lspOstSRU71YHCrN0z9AnNOVlntLWcrGN0AxqasndhayTJg0E KJG5dLDmrvypWsARNLmFICE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy73Gi8cVANAUnNHbXEMWQHF6/Oa+u/qZ+g4B75FyGBjiBOkE5Om3TFlK+kVmZ6UBNtBSO+1g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a1c2:b0:6d6:d54d:4fb1 with SMTP id bx2-20020a170906a1c200b006d6d54d4fb1mr7571170ejb.490.1649235700316; Wed, 06 Apr 2022 02:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmgdl (j120189.upc-j.chello.nl. [24.132.120.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p6-20020a170906614600b006e133d37f8bsm6352723ejl.138.2022.04.06.02.01.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 06 Apr 2022 02:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from avar by gmgdl with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1nc1Xn-000aiO-54; Wed, 06 Apr 2022 11:01:39 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: "brian m. carlson" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Phillip Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] builtin/stash: provide a way to import stashes from a ref Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 11:00:44 +0200 References: <20220310173236.4165310-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <20220403182250.904933-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <20220403182250.904933-5-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <220404.86czhxjewx.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid; Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.7.12 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <220406.86k0c2egb0.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 05 2022, brian m. carlson wrote: >> This test has an implicit dependency on your earlier test and will break >> if it's not defining stash0, e.g. if you use --run=N or use other skip >> test features of test-lib.sh. >> >> Just factor that into a setup function & have the rest call it? > > Yes, most of our tests have that problem. I don't think it's worth > changing the way we do things unless we plan to make a concerted effort > to do that across the codebase and verify that in CI. > > If we really want to make that change across the codebase for the > future, that's fine, but I haven't seen such a discussion on the list so > far. Fair enough. I do think it's a good pattern when adding /new/ code to follow that practice, even if it requires the first added test to have a "git reset --hard" (in liue of fixing various tests above). But not enough to quibbly about it here :) Thanks.