Alex Riesen, Wed, Nov 14, 2007 20:45:22 +0100:
quoted text
> Johannes Schindelin, Wed, Nov 14, 2007 18:10:25 +0100:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Alex Riesen wrote:
> > > Junio C Hamano, Wed, Nov 14, 2007 01:02:20 +0100:
> > > > Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > > Ignore exit code of git push in t5404, as it is not relevant for the 
> > > > > test
> > > > 
> > > > This proposed log message solicits a "Huh? -- Since when ignoring exit 
> > > > code is an improvement?" reaction.  If this push is expected to error 
> > > > out, then wouldn't you want to make sure it errors out as expected?  
> > > > If the problem is that the exit status is unreliable, maybe we need to 
> > > > make it reliable instead?
> > > 
> > > Well, it is kind of undefined. git push just updated some remote 
> > > references and failed on the others. It has had some failures, so it 
> > > returns non-0. And as I said, it really is not about the operation, but 
> > > about if the tracking and remote branches are set as we want them.
> > 
> > If you know it should fail, why not make the test dependent on that 
> > failure?  I mean, should git-push have a bug and not fail, it would be 
> > nice to catch this early...
> > 
> 
> Well, I do not know it _should_ fail. Personally, I would not even
> care: I see no way to cover with just one exit code multiple
> failures. Some references were updated and I don't even know which.
> So I'd better check whatever exit code.

"I'd better check whatever was updated and damn the exit code"

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html