summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/t/t5402-post-merge-hook.sh
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2020-11-09t5400,t5402: consistently indent with tabs, not with spacesLibravatar Johannes Schindelin1-8/+8
This patch actually prepares for the upcoming patches to replace `master` with `main` in these tests: we do not want those changes to be flagged by the new `check-whitespace` GitHub workflow (even if those changes do not introduce the whitespace issues, they touch lines affected by those issues without fixing them). Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-09-03tests: use "git xyzzy" form (t3600 - t6999)Libravatar Nanako Shiraishi1-2/+2
Converts tests between t3600-t6300. Signed-off-by: Nanako Shiraishi <nanako3@lavabit.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-02-01Sane use of test_expect_failureLibravatar Junio C Hamano1-2/+2
Originally, test_expect_failure was designed to be the opposite of test_expect_success, but this was a bad decision. Most tests run a series of commands that leads to the single command that needs to be tested, like this: test_expect_{success,failure} 'test title' ' setup1 && setup2 && setup3 && what is to be tested ' And expecting a failure exit from the whole sequence misses the point of writing tests. Your setup$N that are supposed to succeed may have failed without even reaching what you are trying to test. The only valid use of test_expect_failure is to check a trivial single command that is expected to fail, which is a minority in tests of Porcelain-ish commands. This large-ish patch rewrites all uses of test_expect_failure to use test_expect_success and rewrites the condition of what is tested, like this: test_expect_success 'test title' ' setup1 && setup2 && setup3 && ! this command should fail ' test_expect_failure is redefined to serve as a reminder that that test *should* succeed but due to a known breakage in git it currently does not pass. So if git-foo command should create a file 'bar' but you discovered a bug that it doesn't, you can write a test like this: test_expect_failure 'git-foo should create bar' ' rm -f bar && git foo && test -f bar ' This construct acts similar to test_expect_success, but instead of reporting "ok/FAIL" like test_expect_success does, the outcome is reported as "FIXED/still broken". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-09-18Add post-merge hook, related documentation, and tests.Libravatar Josh England1-0/+56
The post-merge hook enables one to hook in for `git pull` operations in order to check and/or change attributes of a work tree from the hook. As an example, it can be used in combination with a pre-commit hook to save/restore file ownership and permissions data (or file ACLs) within the repository and transparently update the working tree after a `git pull` operation. Signed-off-by: Josh England <jjengla@sandia.gov> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>