Thanks for having a look Jonathan.

Jonathan Nieder wrote:

Ruud van Asseldonk wrote:

quoted

The git-request-pull.sh script invokes Perl,

Okay, on second glance I found it:

   set fnord $(git ls-remote "$url" | @@PERL@@ -e "$find_matching_ref" "${remote:-HEAD}" "$headrev")

This does seem pretty inherently to require perl, so makes sense.

I wonder if we can generalize this.  For example, would it make sense to
have a helper that looks for @@PERL@@ in a file,  so we could say

	if uses_perl git-request-pull.sh && ! test_have_prereq PERL
	then
		...
	fi

That way, this would be more futureproof in case someone eliminates
the perl dependency (either by improving that particular parsing step
or by rewriting the whole program in C).

That sounds like a good idea. How about turning that into a test itself? 
The test would check that the script mentions @@PERL@@, as the first 
subtest. That way, if somebody removes the Perl dependency in the 
future, that will make the test fail, and that will be a reminder to 
remove the check from the test, so the test runs unconditionally.

In any event,
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <redacted>

Do the request-pull tests in t7006-pager.sh need the same treatment?

I think these tests are fine, they run "git -p request-pull", not enough 
arguments to make request-pull do something, so it prints its usage and 
exits with 1. The tests use test_must_fail to verify the exit code, and 
printing usage does go through the pager. request-pull does not call 
Perl when it only prints its usage.