Browse Source

t6423: add an explanation about why one of the tests does not pass

I had long since forgotten the idea behind this test and why it failed,
and took a little while to figure it out.  To prevent others from having
to spend a similar time on it, add an explanation in the comments.
However, the reasoning in the explanation makes me question why I
considered it a failure at all.  I'm not sure if I had a better reason
when I originally wrote it, but for now just add commentary about the
possible expectations and why it behaves the way it does right now.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
maint
Elijah Newren 5 years ago committed by Junio C Hamano
parent
commit
1cb588775f
  1. 8
      t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh

8
t/t6423-merge-rename-directories.sh

@ -2843,6 +2843,14 @@ test_expect_success '9f: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs @@ -2843,6 +2843,14 @@ test_expect_success '9f: Renamed directory that only contained immediate subdirs
# Commit A: priority/{alpha,bravo}/$more_files
# Commit B: goal/{a,b}/$more_files, goal/c
# Expected: priority/{alpha,bravo}/$more_files, priority/c
# We currently fail this test because the directory renames we detect are
# goal/a/ -> priority/alpha/
# goal/b/ -> priority/bravo/
# We do not detect
# goal/ -> priority/
# because of no files found within goal/, and the fact that "a" != "alpha"
# and "b" != "bravo". But I'm not sure it's really a failure given that
# viewpoint...

test_setup_9g () {
test_create_repo 9g &&

Loading…
Cancel
Save