On 2019.07.30 09:13, Martin Ågren wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 01:43, Josh Steadmon wrote:
> >
> > On 2019.07.29 22:04, Martin Ågren wrote:
> > > This script seems to me like if it passes 100%, we can be fairly sure
> > > we're ok, but [...]
>
> > Will squash these as you said in V3. Will also
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 01:43, Josh Steadmon wrote:
>
> On 2019.07.29 22:04, Martin Ågren wrote:
> > This script seems to me like if it passes 100%, we can be fairly sure
> > we're ok, but [...]
> Will squash these as you said in V3. Will also think about whether
> another test approach would make
On 2019.07.29 22:04, Martin Ågren wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 00:57, Josh Steadmon wrote:
> > +test_expect_success '--no-verify with succeeding hook (merge)' '
> > +
> > + git checkout side &&
> > + git merge --no-verify -m "merge master" master &&
> > + git checkout master
>
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 00:57, Josh Steadmon wrote:
> +test_expect_success '--no-verify with succeeding hook (merge)' '
> +
> + git checkout side &&
> + git merge --no-verify -m "merge master" master &&
> + git checkout master
> +
> +'
This test doesn't even try to verify that th
From: Michael J Gruber
Add tests which make sure that the pre-merge-hook is called when
present, allows/disallows merge commits depending on its return value
and is suppressed by "--no-verify".
[js: renamed test as suggested in review comments]
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber
Signed-off-by: Jo
5 matches
Mail list logo