| Message ID | 0d3b18cd35423dadd35d55073bd7230bfc908fee.1619519903.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Prepare tests for reftable backend | expand |
On Tue, Apr 27 2021, Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget wrote: > From: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com> > > The reftable format guarantees that reflog entries are well-formed > > Signed-off-by: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com> > --- > t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh b/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh > index 80d94704d012..72a5ac61a520 100755 > --- a/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh > +++ b/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh > @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ test_expect_success 'min/max age uses entry date to limit' ' > test_cmp expect actual > ' > > -test_expect_success 'walk prefers reflog to ref tip' ' > +test_expect_success REFFILES 'walk prefers reflog to ref tip' ' > head=$(git rev-parse HEAD) && > one=$(git rev-parse one) && > ident="$GIT_COMMITTER_NAME <$GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL> $GIT_COMMITTER_DATE" && Isn't the point of this test added in 7cf686b9a8 (t1414: document some reflog-walk oddities, 2017-07-07) to test what we do not when the reflog isn't well formed, but when the reflog and branch history disagree about what the latest tip is? Perhaps reftable is going to guarantee that that'll never happen via some transaction mechanism (I'm not sure), but if I'm right then I think it's worth at least calling out that difference in the commit message and/or modified test description. Not a big deal, but this also makes me somewhat question the name "REFFILES" as a prereq if we really mean (as we are in the first test that uses this) "we don't need this under reftable, specifically". Maybe I'm overthinking things and it's stupid to split these up, as we have no other planned ref backend, but for any such future test backend / readability I'd find it much easier to grok if we clearly deliniate/use REFFILES for tests that really are testing the ref files backend specifically, v.s. say a !REFTABLE for things that we're skipping because REFTABLE in particular makes certain guarantees we can count on. Say that the reflog and branch is never out of sync. Of course this also uses ref .. files, anyway, just food for thought.
diff --git a/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh b/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh index 80d94704d012..72a5ac61a520 100755 --- a/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh +++ b/t/t1414-reflog-walk.sh @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ test_expect_success 'min/max age uses entry date to limit' ' test_cmp expect actual ' -test_expect_success 'walk prefers reflog to ref tip' ' +test_expect_success REFFILES 'walk prefers reflog to ref tip' ' head=$(git rev-parse HEAD) && one=$(git rev-parse one) && ident="$GIT_COMMITTER_NAME <$GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL> $GIT_COMMITTER_DATE" &&