Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-16 Thread Philip Oakley
From: "Junio C Hamano" Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 7:12 PM "Philip Oakley" writes: What kind of benefit are you envisioning out of this? The purpose of tests is to detect mistakes and spot regressions. A change to the 'git version X.Y.z' string would be a regression, as I spotted earli

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-16 Thread Junio C Hamano
David Aguilar writes: > The "regression" is that there are scripts and tools in the wild that > need to know the git version when deciding whether or not to use some > new feature. > > e.g. "git status --ignore-submodules=dirty" did not appear until git 1.7.2. > A script may want to use this flag

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-16 Thread David Aguilar
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > "Philip Oakley" writes: > > >> What kind of benefit are you envisioning out of this? > > > > The purpose of tests is to detect mistakes and spot regressions. > > > > A change to the 'git version X.Y.z' string would be a regression, as I

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-16 Thread Junio C Hamano
"Philip Oakley" writes: >> What kind of benefit are you envisioning out of this? > > The purpose of tests is to detect mistakes and spot regressions. > > A change to the 'git version X.Y.z' string would be a regression, as I > spotted earlier, as it conflicts with expectations of standard > progr

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-16 Thread Philip Oakley
From: "Junio C Hamano" Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 2:39 AM "Philip Oakley" writes: If the "parsing" is done for white/blacklist purposes, is there a need to straight-jacket the verison string format like this series? The purpose is to document what we felt we could guarantee, and that whic

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
"Philip Oakley" writes: >> If the "parsing" is done for white/blacklist purposes, is there a >> need to straight-jacket the verison string format like this series? > > The purpose is to document what we felt we could guarantee, and that > which was open to variation, so that those, like the Git-G

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-14 Thread Philip Oakley
From: "Junio C Hamano" Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2013 8:22 PM Philip Oakley writes: This patch series seeks to add tests for the version string format and document it. The key questions to be answered are: * should the test be inside t, or somewhere else? * should the version string be lim

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
Philip Oakley writes: > This patch series seeks to add tests for the version string format > and document it. > > The key questions to be answered are: > * should the test be inside t, or somewhere else? > * should the version string be limited to one line, <80 characters? One line, perhaps,

[RFC/PATCH 0/2] Test the Git version string

2013-04-14 Thread Philip Oakley
In $gmane/217004 I was noted that the git version string is used in the wild for confirming which git version is in use. This patch series seeks to add tests for the version string format and document it. The key questions to be answered are: * should the test be inside t, or somewhere else?