From: Elijah Newren <email@example.com> To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Cc: Junio C Hamano <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget <email@example.com>, Git Mailing List <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] merge-recursive: fix merging a subdirectory into the root directory Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 15:31:09 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CABPp-BG1ir2kXkxMmNQ2btDKvpSWg9QwcUnoy_5teuNO=JhAFA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.email@example.com> Hi Dscho, On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 3:17 PM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > > Hi Elijah, > > On Wed, 30 Oct 2019, Elijah Newren wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 6:20 PM Junio C Hamano <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > > > > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes: > > > > > > >> Still, I rely pretty heavily on t6036, t6042, t6043, and t6046 for > > > >> sanity in the face of refactoring and rewriting -- and as mentioned > > > >> before they have caught refactoring bugs in those areas that appear at > > > >> first blush as "overzealous", ... > > > > > > > > One idea would be to try to guard those extra careful tests behind the > > > > `EXPENSIVE` prereq. > > > > > > Yeah, I like that---I think it is perfectly in line with the spirit > > > of EXPENSIVE, too. > > > > Or perhaps EXPENSIVE_ON_WINDOWS, since it's actually pretty cheap on > > linux and not that bad on Mac > > Why the complexity? If you separate out the expensive tests (even if > they are only expensive in terms of run time on Windows), it will make > the regression tests so much more readable to the occasional reader > (making them less expensive in terms of reading time...). The "extra careful" things you were complaining about with the new test I was adding to t6043 was true of every single test in that file...and likely much of t6036, t6042, and perhaps even t6046 (though those have fewer tests than t6043). I have no clue where I'd even begin to draw the line between them. If it's possible, it sounds extremely complex. Just using the EXPENSIVE_ON_WINDOWS prereq that already exists would be easy and simple. Or did you mean you wanted me to duplicate every single test and attempt to trim down the duplicates somehow? That'd be a rather large undertaking that sounds rather unappealing on a few fronts, but maybe that's what you had in mind? > > However, if we're going down that route, perhaps t9001-send-email.sh > > could be wrapped in an EXPENSIVE prerequisite? That single test file > > takes an inordinate percentage of overall runtime. One one box with a > > few extra cpus, that test both starts first and finishes last...and > > it's not far from that on even normal boxes. > > I would be okay with that. > > No, let me try that again. I would be _totally_ okay with that. Ooh, sweet, sounds like I should propose it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-30 22:31 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-10-11 20:42 [PATCH 0/2] Dir rename fixes Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget 2019-10-11 20:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] merge-recursive: clean up get_renamed_dir_portion() Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget 2019-10-12 19:47 ` Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-11 20:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] merge-recursive: fix merging a subdirectory into the root directory Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget 2019-10-12 20:37 ` Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-13 0:40 ` Elijah Newren 2019-10-14 10:41 ` Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-22 19:15 ` Elijah Newren 2019-10-24 22:22 ` Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-25 0:12 ` Elijah Newren 2019-10-25 13:30 ` Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-29 1:20 ` Junio C Hamano 2019-10-30 7:01 ` Elijah Newren 2019-10-30 22:16 ` Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-30 22:31 ` Elijah Newren [this message] 2019-10-31 8:28 ` Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-12 18:41 ` [PATCH 0/2] Dir rename fixes Johannes Schindelin 2019-10-22 21:22 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] " Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget 2019-10-22 21:22 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] merge-recursive: clean up get_renamed_dir_portion() Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget 2019-10-22 21:22 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] merge-recursive: fix merging a subdirectory into the root directory Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget 2019-10-22 21:22 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] t604: do not run setup in separate tests Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
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 * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to='CABPp-BG1ir2kXkxMmNQ2btDKvpSWg9QwcUnoy_5teuNO=JhAFA@mail.gmail.com' \ --email@example.com \ --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/2] merge-recursive: fix merging a subdirectory into the root directory' \ /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
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).