Conversation
The previous commit moved error message from stderr to stdout, following the convention of git-rsl. This updates the test code to follow.
Add merge-pr command
Update git-rsl dep
ZackPierce
left a comment
ZackPierce
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So, why were all the old tests / features removed along with the bash implementation? Seems like some overlap in test regime could help improve confidence in the reimplementation.
| The `secure-fetch` subcommand will only fetch the currently checked out branch. It | ||
| will also create a nonce on the `rsl` branch and therefore will prompt for GPG | ||
| signature as part of that commit. | ||
| /// TODO |
| git commit -m "Initial Revision" | ||
| git secure-push origin master | ||
|
|
||
| git co -b devel |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably best to keep the use of aliases down when we're already introducing new things.
| @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ | |||
| error_chain!{ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Non-actionable, emotional opinion based reaction: "ugh, error_chain magic contamination"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
git-rsl uses it, so I used it here.
| @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| fn main() { | |||
| println!("promotet p"); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd recommend leaving this file (and Cargo.toml entry) out if the implementation is absent. The other binary is a good enough example to go by, so the scaffolding value seems outweighed by the "mild false advertising" effect.
| ).unwrap(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| use std::process::Command; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should move this use statement into the function below, or put it at the top of the file with the rest.
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| use std::env; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similarly, either move use into the scope where it is employed or at the file/mod top.
|
w.r.t. the tests: I actually just blew the whole thing away and started it over. I'll look over the tests to see if there's anything worth keeping. |
2 participants
No description provided.