Thread (2 messages) flat view 2 messages, 2 authors, 2024-08-21

Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] check-mailmap: accept "user@host" contacts

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2024-08-21 18:26:08

Josh Steadmon [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
 test_expect_success 'check-mailmap bogus contact' '
-	test_must_fail git check-mailmap bogus
+	cat >expect <<-EOF &&
+	<bogus>
+	EOF
+	git check-mailmap bogus >actual &&
+	test_cmp expect actual
 '
I think I'd just remove this test case altogether, IIUC it' doesn't
provide any additional value vs. the "check-mailmap simple address: no
mapping" test below.
Sorry, but I do not follow.  The other one is [off-list ref]
that looks more globally routable address than a local-only <bogus>
mailbox.  Isn't it worth ensuring that we will keep treating them
the same way?

Having said that ...
quoted
-For each ``Name $$<user@host>$$'' or ``$$<user@host>$$'' from the command-line
-or standard input (when using `--stdin`), look up the person's canonical name
-and email address (see "Mapping Authors" below). If found, print them;
-otherwise print the input as-is.
+For each ``Name $$<user@host>$$'', ``$$<user@host>$$'', or ``$$user@host$$''
+from the command-line or standard input (when using `--stdin`), look up the
+person's canonical name and email address (see "Mapping Authors" below). If
+found, print them; otherwise print the input as-is.
... it seems that <user> without <@host> is a supported format.
Should we update the document, too? 

If the @host-less name is meant to trigger a random unspecified
behaviour, whatever the code happens to do, that is perfectly fine,
but then we probably should not be etching it in the stone by
writing a test for it.  So because of a  reason that is completely
different from yours, I'd support removal of the "bogus" test, if
that is the case.

Thanks.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help