[PATCH] t/README: clarify test_must_fail description

From: Brandon Casey <redacted>

Some have found the wording of the description to be somewhat ambiguous
with respect to when it is desirable to use test_must_fail instead of
"! <git-command>".  Tweak the wording somewhat to hopefully clarify that
it is _because_ test_must_fail can detect segmentation fault that it is
desirable to use it instead of "! <git-command>".

Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <redacted>
---


On 07/20/2010 11:38 AM, Jared Hance wrote:

I think the wording of description of test_must_fail is slightly
ambiguous. I read it to mean that:

    Use test_must_fail only when you are testing to see if git will
    segfault.

I think that is a correct interpretation.  But I ask you this:
Are there times when we would _not_ want to test for segfault? :)

Rather than:
    
    Use test_must_fail to be safe from git segfaults.


Perhaps the description should be updated to be a bit more clear?

How about this?


 t/README |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/t/README b/t/README
index b906ceb..a830daa 100644
--- a/t/README
+++ b/t/README

@@ -451,8 +451,8 @@ library for your script to use.
  - test_must_fail <git-command>
 
    Run a git command and ensure it fails in a controlled way.  Use
-   this instead of "! <git-command>" to fail when git commands
-   segfault.
+   this instead of "! <git-command>" since it will fail when git
+   commands segfault.
 
  - test_might_fail <git-command>
 

-- 
1.6.6.2