From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9866C2018A for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 12:25:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751445AbcFXMZq (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2016 08:25:46 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f66.google.com ([209.85.214.66]:35907 "EHLO mail-it0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751089AbcFXMZp (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2016 08:25:45 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f66.google.com with SMTP id h190so2046023ith.3 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 05:25:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=3oSh5Ik5oiWulhhGsi3KI2AtrBbU56gBGB88CuRbo78=; b=v0b3cipTgEeO5nk2mZPHBNciCOO1+r/Xg/ilrML5et+xMlN0uxGRZWQe1gMgKpcui1 WJUJyQ0ejzOhPZOTFoCWRpKvqZCK5WnmaFBaKA4HR5OJRyBwfhI8Bp/9DR1mhsCt7ByW V2n2YcBCd26DbUnnakBNy7p4O+uF8w0GwR+32AOORKCNlP2UvoyYGqDvq3GzOk78U48q +3gZY2l47tZ+s/D/Mt5OSz+l0FqpqceLIQ42/QvmrwEh2YQWxpfT7JvvoR0T2LY0X6q6 Ozv8iZNeskkmv5/ax3CTSmUUq75lOUeSqVaVB5hOfrwaQkM0ErsSLjdZb6wc/X3hprTe n2IQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3oSh5Ik5oiWulhhGsi3KI2AtrBbU56gBGB88CuRbo78=; b=VcmmtE1EyjF/px3KIpOy+bo/uZ/E0UHwb4koXK0G1rVuYEm6jeknyTKv4DSPmRoSVw Q9/DrB9DQByfX6CrU4WPdkHnEo4jh/0MmPNargMs1ZDa4Ah6mKiLKQPAfb+2d6q6o+wh kW1nwhdrzFmg4uM3HAuHagrnZ9hA6T/jXtgV1FFszOn7/aKMpU2WprYT/1oz5CT01rYg TgexLHmboMpDe+drKKIVxbJcg0HrAuTB06KkNnTWIIiDD5i7eYiPWXSzmaYTDDDWBLxJ b7A1MGJNnnKmIMg1J8WVQLO/fmuGFameYbORLA07UhrS7RCtFX6wEYAOOcEtGsWYZpub xg0w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLKaKjCHLUwZ1etA3Ra9DH2yDeRGCF6v/g8OfPtzpCelnIhGehhI4yAWYJ9blJgYpyEAPTOP3YPTZUiiA== X-Received: by 10.36.98.136 with SMTP id d130mr25010692itc.84.1466771144582; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 05:25:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.0.30 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 05:25:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20160622165126.12786-1-mehul.jain2029@gmail.com> From: Eric Sunshine Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 08:25:44 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: sE670adxvN7SYyzaT6HdN9c425E Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Introduce log.showSignature config variable To: Mehul Jain Cc: Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Mehul Jain wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Mehul Jain writes: >>> In patch 2/3 and 3/3, there are many tests which requires a branch >>> similar to that of "signed" branch, i.e. a branch with a commit having >>> GPG signature. So previously in v2, I created two new branches, >>> "test_sign" and "no_sign", which are identical to that of "signed" >>> branch. And with these branches, I wrote the tests in patch 2/3 >>> and 3/3. >>> >>> As suggested by Eric [1], rather than creating new branches, I >>> can take advantage of "signed" branch which already exists. >> >> Yeah, I understand that part. But you do not _need_ to do the split >> you do in 1/3 in order to reuse "signed". > > If it's fine, then I think it would be OK to drop this 1/3. Without splitting > the 'log --graph --show-signature' in two test will also serve the > purpose for the new test to use the signed branch. My understanding of Junio's response is that the missing PGP prerequisite along with a weak commit message make for poor justification of patch 1/3, however, if you add the prerequisite and use the commit message he proposed (reproduced below) then it becomes sensible to retain 1/3. --->8--- In 2/3 and 3/3, we will use the same 'signed' branch that the first test for 'log --graph --show-signature' uses. This branch is currently created in that 'log --graph --show-signature' test itself. Split the set-up part into a test of its own, and make the existing first test into a separate one that only inspects the history on the 'signed' branch. That way, it would become clearer that later tests added by 2/3 and 3/3 reuse the 'signed' branch in the same way this 'log --graph --show-signature' uses that same branch. --->8---