| commit | 9e62316df7f918eabc879f97da76543cc5f0b3fc | |
| author | Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> | |
| Wed, 29 Apr 2015 20:14:50 +0000 (29 13:14 -0700) | ||
| committer | Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> | |
| Wed, 29 Apr 2015 20:14:50 +0000 (29 13:14 -0700) | ||
| tree | 02c011e93166426fb92f07ccd355b20c04625b51 | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | fdf96a20acf96a6ac538df8113b2aafd6ed71d50 | commitdiff |
merge: test the top-level merge driver
We seem to have tests for specific merge strategy backends
(e.g. recursive), but not much test coverage for the "git merge"
itself. As I am planning to update the semantics of merging
"FETCH_HEAD" in such a way that these two
git pull . topic_a topic_b...
vs.
git fetch . topic_a topic_b...
git merge FETCH_HEAD
are truly equivalent, let me add a few test cases to cover the
tricky ones.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We seem to have tests for specific merge strategy backends
(e.g. recursive), but not much test coverage for the "git merge"
itself. As I am planning to update the semantics of merging
"FETCH_HEAD" in such a way that these two
git pull . topic_a topic_b...
vs.
git fetch . topic_a topic_b...
git merge FETCH_HEAD
are truly equivalent, let me add a few test cases to cover the
tricky ones.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
| t/t3033-merge-toplevel.sh | [new file with mode: 0755] | blob |