Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] describe: setup working tree for --dirty




Am Fr., 1. Feb. 2019 um 21:12 Uhr schrieb Eric Sunshine
<sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 8:55 AM Sebastian Staudt <koraktor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > We don't use NEED_WORK_TREE when running the git-describe builtin,
> > since you should be able to describe a commit even in a bare repository.
> > However, the --dirty flag does need a working tree. Since we don't call
> > setup_work_tree(), it uses whatever directory we happen to be in. That's
> > unlikely to match our index, meaning we'd say "dirty" even when the real
> > working tree is clean.
> > [...]
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Staudt <koraktor@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/t/t6120-describe.sh b/t/t6120-describe.sh
> > @@ -145,14 +145,38 @@ check_describe A-* HEAD
> > +test_expect_success 'describe --dirty with --work-tree' '
> > +       [...]
> > +'
> >
> > +test_expect_success 'describe --dirty with --work-tree' '
> > +       [...]
> > +'
>
> Can you give these two new tests different titles to make it easier to
> narrow down a problem to one or the other if one of them does fail?
> Perhaps the second test could be titled:
>
>     test_expect_success 'describe --dirty with dirty --work-tree' '
>
> or something.

Thanks, didn‘t notice this.
I‘d use a suffix (dirty) for my test titles. But this won‘t work for tests
using check_describe(). Any objections?