Re: [RFC/PATCH v2] pull: add --set-upstream

On 07/06/2016 09:06, Matthieu Moy wrote:

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

+test_config_unchanged () {
+	git config --list --local >original
+	"$@"
+	git config --list --local >modified
+	test_cmp original modified
+}

The test passes if "$@" fails. You should &&-chain the lines here to
catch things like crashes or unexpected "exit 1" in git.

That is true, but allowing "$@" failure may be deliberate.

I don't think so:

+test_expect_success 'pull -u should not work when merging unrelated histories' '
+	git checkout master &&
+	test_config_unchanged test_must_fail git pull -u step_parent master
+'

;-)

When writing `test_config_unchanged` procedure, I wanted to return the 
comparison even if "$@" failed. But it's indeed not consistent with the 
way I wrote the tests.

Adding "&&" between instructions and using `test_must_fail` when calling 
the procedure is clearer and more logical.