Re: ab/fsck-unexpected-type (and "cat-file replace handling and optimization")

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

In this case I think neither is churn. I needed to clean up the earlier
part of the test script so that my later tests didn't break, and Ævar
touched the same area to cover more cases in those tests.
...
One other possible thing to do during the resolution is combine the
cleanup of both objects in a single test (since in Ævar's series, both
objects are created together).

That is what makes it a churn X-<.

More coverage does not have to be tied to turning a sequence of
tests into a loop, moving things around, etc.  Just adding more of
similar things wouldn't have caused such a clash with a possible
mismerge.

But I need to point out that it is recognised as a churn only when
there is an unfortunate topic that wants to touch the overlapping
area at the same time.  If there isn't, such a change would be seen
as a valuable preliminary clean-up ;-)

So, of course, it depends on luck.