-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Issue #618: Add new subcommand git machete list childless
#632
Issue #618: Add new subcommand git machete list childless
#632
Conversation
git machete list childless
tests/test_list.py
Outdated
.new_branch("feature_1") | ||
.commit("feature_1 commit.") | ||
) | ||
launch_command("discover", "-y") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmmm maybe better just fill up .git/machete file explicitly? It'll make it more clear how the branch layout is supposed to look
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, i can just add the expected layout in the comment below, @PawelLipski wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
like:
# content of the machete definition file:
"""
master
develop
feature_0
feature_0_0
feature_0_0_0
feature_0_1
feature_1
"""
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could be... but it might get outdated with the changes to the test. TBH I'd just overwrite machete file explicitly, no need to kinda-test discover
in an otherwise non-discover
-related test
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@PawelLipski I tried overwriting def file but i still had to leave the creation of the branches and the commits so in the end it looked less clear plus it could get outdated as well, i don't see why it would be better
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, my bad, it would not get updated as the tests will probably fail, will try again
00bc711
to
f407ddf
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #632 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 67.91% 69.54% +1.62%
===========================================
Files 10 10
Lines 2927 2932 +5
Branches 707 709 +2
===========================================
+ Hits 1988 2039 +51
+ Misses 678 623 -55
- Partials 261 270 +9
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
4125a22
to
4f592a1
Compare
4f592a1
to
5274f31
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's ship it then!
No description provided.