Patchwork [5,of,5] test-status-rev: document one more broken test

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Martin von Zweigbergk
Date Nov. 5, 2014, 5:39 a.m.
Message ID <684cc1b66cb739c4412f.1415165973@handduk2.mtv.corp.google.com>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/6568/
State Accepted
Headers show

Comments

Martin von Zweigbergk - Nov. 5, 2014, 5:39 a.m.
# HG changeset patch
# User Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com>
# Date 1415132766 28800
#      Tue Nov 04 12:26:06 2014 -0800
# Node ID 684cc1b66cb739c4412f7cd312b924e63bd10377
# Parent  c537f54c03a3681b3ab8473563db593d04aa1997
test-status-rev: document one more broken test

The status for missing_content2_content2-untracked doesn't get
reported at all. Since the file does exist in the working copy, it
should reported as unknown. Document that in the test.
Pierre-Yves David - Nov. 5, 2014, 11:58 a.m.
On 11/05/2014 05:39 AM, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
> # HG changeset patch
> # User Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com>
> # Date 1415132766 28800
> #      Tue Nov 04 12:26:06 2014 -0800
> # Node ID 684cc1b66cb739c4412f7cd312b924e63bd10377
> # Parent  c537f54c03a3681b3ab8473563db593d04aa1997
> test-status-rev: document one more broken test

This series is pushed to the clowncopter.

As a side note, I'm not super fan of the new names (but accepting the 
series since they are obvious improvement).

My main issue with the new names are:

- "missing" and "content1" have different length, breaking the beautiful 
alignment you could have

- "content1" and "content2" are very similar, making it more tiresome 
than it could to spot different (reinforcement by non alignment)

- "tracked" and "untracked" are very similar, so it requires more 
scrutiny to spot different there (again, reinforced by non alignement).


Maybe we could try something based on "missing", "111111", "222222", and 
"333333" (probably not the best we can come with). once we are done 
flushing your series.
Martin von Zweigbergk - Nov. 6, 2014, 11:30 p.m.
I just found the below in my drafts. I thought I had already sent it.

On Wed, Nov 5, 2014, 03:58 Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@ens-lyon.org>
wrote:

>
>
> On 11/05/2014 05:39 AM, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
> > # HG changeset patch
> > # User Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com>
> > # Date 1415132766 28800
> > #      Tue Nov 04 12:26:06 2014 -0800
> > # Node ID 684cc1b66cb739c4412f7cd312b924e63bd10377
> > # Parent  c537f54c03a3681b3ab8473563db593d04aa1997
> > test-status-rev: document one more broken test
>
> This series is pushed to the clowncopter.
>
> As a side note, I'm not super fan of the new names (but accepting the
> series since they are obvious improvement).
>
> My main issue with the new names are:
>
> - "missing" and "content1" have different length, breaking the beautiful
> alignment you could have
>
> - "content1" and "content2" are very similar, making it more tiresome
> than it could to spot different (reinforcement by non alignment)
>
> - "tracked" and "untracked" are very similar, so it requires more
> scrutiny to spot different there (again, reinforced by non alignement).
>
>
> Maybe we could try something based on "missing", "111111", "222222", and
> "333333" (probably not the best we can come with). once we are done
> flushing your series.
>

I agree. I considered shorter and better-aligned names like x-1-2t, but the
current names have the advantage that not much explanation is needed. But
sure, let's get back to it after the next and final series on this topic
(that is now, btw).

Patch

diff --git a/tests/test-status-rev.t b/tests/test-status-rev.t
--- a/tests/test-status-rev.t
+++ b/tests/test-status-rev.t
@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ 
   R content1_missing_content3-untracked
   $ hg status -A --rev 1 missing_content2_missing-tracked
   ! missing_content2_missing-tracked
+BROKEN: file exists, so should be listed (as '?')
   $ hg status -A --rev 1 missing_content2_content2-untracked
   $ hg status -A --rev 1 missing_content2_content3-tracked
   A missing_content2_content3-tracked