clock: Replace [<TestCase>] tests with individual tests (#298)

[balazsbotond]

See #298

[robkeim]

Great work, thanks @balazsbotond!

[robkeim]

@balazsbotond I've noticed that all of your PRs tend to have a lot of unrelated changes that have already been merged. I've been merging them with squash commits so it doesn't show up in the history (except the extended description). This one for example has 8 commits. Do you know why that is?

[balazsbotond]

@robkeim I don't know exactly why but I think if I delete my fork, create a new one, develop all new changes in separate branches and delete them after the pull request has been merged, and then update my fork with --ff-only, the issue will be resolved. I'll try it with the next pull request.

[robkeim]

You don't need to delete your fork, you just need to make a pull from the upstream branch to keep your fork up-to-date.

Here's the script that I use to update my fork:

git fetch upstream
git checkout master
git merge upstream/master
git push

Once your fork is up-to-date, then you can develop your changes from the head of master. Does that make sense?

[balazsbotond]

Thanks. I did the exact same thing, so I have no idea what went wrong...

[robkeim]

Hmm... I'm not sure then. Did you rebase on to master after updating your fork?

I'm not a git wizard so I can't tell you all of the commands to make sure that things look right, but I use SourceTree to visualize the source history and make sure everything looks right before sending my PRs.

[ErikSchierboom]

About the Git stuff, I also noticed that. It's not really a problem due to us being able to squash the commits, however it does look a bit odd. How I usually approach this, is by doing a rebase on my branch.

So suppose I have the branch checked out that I will submit as a PR. I then do the following:

git fetch upstream
git rebase upstream/master
git push --force

This will rebase the branch based on the latest master branch of the upstream remote. You then usually have to do force push, as the tree has become different. This is no problem, as long as you are pushing the branch to your own fork (which I assume you are the only one working on).

Note that if you use the GitHub desktop client to clone the repository, the original remote (from which you forked) will be named exercism. So in that case, exercism replaces upstream.

[ErikSchierboom]

And thanks for the PR @balazsbotond! Hopefully @kytrinyx will soon be able to add you as a maintainer.

[balazsbotond]

Thanks @ErikSchierboom, this solution looks very promising - I'll try it for my next pull request :)