[PATCH 2 of 5] test-revert: don't unnecessarily pipe through 'cat'
Martin von Zweigbergk
martinvonz at google.com
Mon Nov 3 12:00:10 CST 2014
On Mon Nov 03 2014 at 5:20:28 AM Pierre-Yves David <
pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/02/2014 11:05 PM, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun Nov 02 2014 at 2:45:40 PM Pierre-Yves David
> > <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org <mailto:pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/02/2014 10:19 PM, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
> > > # HG changeset patch
> > > # User Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz at google.com
> > <mailto:martinvonz at google.com>>
> > > # Date 1413682221 25200
> > > # Sat Oct 18 18:30:21 2014 -0700
> > > # Branch stable
> > > # Node ID 9439327a222474b6af32ed9f717bfc__e81f90e53b
> > > # Parent 5df55ad6918a76870695dfe8551683__09bb5da27c
> > > test-revert: don't unnecessarily pipe through 'cat'
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tests/test-revert.t b/tests/test-revert.t
> > > --- a/tests/test-revert.t
> > > +++ b/tests/test-revert.t
> > > @@ -730,7 +730,7 @@
> > >
> > > Setup working directory
> > >
> > > - $ python ../gen-revert-cases.py wc | cat
> > > + $ python ../gen-revert-cases.py wc
> > > $ hg addremove --similarity 0
> > > removing added_removed
> > > removing added_revert
> >
> >
> > check-code says hi:
> >
> > Skipping mercurial/httpclient/__socketutil.py it has
> > no-che?k-code (glob)
> > + tests/test-revert.t:733:
> > + > $ python ../gen-revert-cases.py wc
> > + filter wc output
> > + [1]
> >
> >
> > Oops, sorry about that. What's the purpose of it? The check was in the
> > first version of check-code, so I couldn't find any explanation for it
> > in the changelog.
>
> I don't known why it is here. We should probably ask Matt about it (cced
> him)
>
> > I'm not sure about the 3 others patches. What is wrong with some
> > duplicated case? Why is it worth introducing special casing to
> > remove them ?
> >
> >
> > I think the file histories are clearer when expressed in terms of the
> > states rather than transitions, so in the end (after ~7 more patches),
> > e.g. 'modified_untracked-clean' becomes
> > 'content1_content2_untracked_content2'. The generation script actually
> > becomes a bit simpler at that point. I suppose a 11-patch series is too
> > long. Do you want to see the end state in some other form before you
> decide?
>
> You should include this kind of high level goal in your commit message:
>
> I'm doing XXX because we want to be able to do YYY in the future. The
> change is correct because YYY
>
I put the motivation in the first patch now instead of the main one. Thanks.
> This seems a reasonable changes, but it makes is a bit (but just a bit)
> harder to compute the expected revert action from the name (since you
> have to make the diff yourself).
>
> I'm curious about the whole series. Can you push to non publishing repo
> for me to have a look ?
>
Available at
https://bitbucket.org/martinvonz/hg/branch/stable?head=e8138b5aaaf96501827715c89144367d9622eb3b
>
> (note, your naming scheme should make a clearer distinction between each
> part, eg: content1_content2_untracked-content2)
>
Ah, great idea. Done.
PS: not sure what you use as a MUA but is appears to be quite bad at
> standard quoting.
>
Sorry, that's the new Google Inbox.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20141103/0acca7a8/attachment.html>
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list