On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 6:51 AM Patrick Steinhardt [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 12:25:31AM +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote:

quoted

Makes sense. Also, I'm kind of cat-one-the-wall about whether it makes sense
to have two projects about the unit test migration effort itself. If we're
clear that both of them would not overlap, it should be fine. Otherwise, it
would be better to merge them as Patrick suggests.

I don't quite mind either way. I think overall we have enough tests that
can be converted even if both projects got picked up separately. And the
reftable unit tests are a bit more involved than the other tests given
that their coding style doesn't fit at all into the Git project. So it's
not like they can just be copied over, they definitely need some special
care.

Also, the technical complexity of the "reftable" backend is rather high,
which is another hurdle to take.

Which overall makes me lean more towards keeping this as a separate
project now that I think about it.

Ok, for me. If we have a contributor working on each of these 2
projects, we just need to be clear that the contributors should not
work together on the 2 projects as I think the GSoC forbids that.

quoted

That said, how helpful would it be to link the following doc in the unit
testing related ideas?

https://github.com/git/git/blob/master/Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt

Makes sense to me.

To me too.

quoted

Would it worth linking the reftable technical doc for the above ideas?

https://git-scm.com/docs/reftable

I could see it goes into a lot of detail. I'm just wondering if link to it
would help someone who's looking to learn about reftable.

Definitely doesn't hurt.

I agree.

Thanks!