Subject: Re: [PATCH 26/27] t/*svn*: fix moderate &&-chain breakage

From: Jeff King <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:02:39 -0400

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:35:56PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > Michael J Gruber <[email-masked]> writes:
> >
> >> All of these cases are moderate since they would most probably not
> >> lead to missed failing tests: Either they would fail otherwise,
> >> or fail a rm in test_when_finished only.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <[email-masked]>
> >> ---
> >>  t/t2026-prune-linked-checkouts.sh |  4 ++--
> >>  t/t9158-git-svn-mergeinfo.sh      |  4 ++--
> >>  t/t9161-git-svn-mergeinfo-push.sh | 10 +++++-----
> >>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > Ahh, it seems that I should have read everything in my inbox before
> > starting my day X-<.  I already queued an identical patch for 2026
> > on nd/multiple-work-trees, and its new tip is in 'next' now.
> >
> > Which branches are the git-svn ones meant to apply?  Are they meant
> > to fix an existing bug already in master, or are they new ones added
> > by still-in-flight topics?  Can you split if necessary and mark them
> > for individual topios in flight if that is the case, so that we can
> > apply them independently from GIT_TEST_CHAIN_LINT series?
> >
> > Thanks.
> 
> OK, I think I figured it out.  All the git-svn bits in 26 and 27 are
> for 'master', and should be part of Peff's original 25-patch series.
> I'll drop 2026 from your 26/25 and queue it together with your 27/25
> on top off it.

Yeah, that was my impression, too. I don't have svn installed on my
system, so I missed those ones. I don't have CVS either. That might be
worth following up on.

-Peff