Move BashUnit tests to another directory

[fredden]

Description

There are no code changes here other than renaming the directory from 'EndToEnd' to 'EndToEndBash'. This change paves the way for another EndToEnd flavour to exist.

Suggested changelog entry

None required.

Related issues/external references

Relates to #1292

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • This change is only breaking for integrators, not for external standards or end-users.
• Documentation improvement

PR checklist

• I have checked there is no other PR open for the same change.
• I have read the Contribution Guidelines.
• I grant the project the right to include and distribute the code under the BSD-3-Clause license (and I have the right to grant these rights).
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• I have verified that the code complies with the projects coding standards.
• [Required for new sniffs] I have added XML documentation for the sniff.
• I have opened a sister-PR in the documentation repository to update the Wiki.

[jrfnl]

@fredden Looks like this PR is out-of-sync ? In the code, the directory refs now read tests/EndToEndBashUnit, but the actual directory looks to be called tests/EndToEndBash ?

If you want my opinion, I think EndToEndBash is probably the right name as it describes the type of tests without hard-linking it to the tooling used to run them.

[jrfnl]

Thought: should this be pulled to the 3.x branch instead of 4.x branch ? I wonder how much having this change only in 4.x will complicate merge-ups.

[fredden]

Thought: should this be pulled to the 3.x branch instead of 4.x branch ? I wonder how much having this change only in 4.x will complicate merge-ups.

I did a quick check by trying to cherry-pick this commit back to the 3.x branch.

I can resolve these and target the 3.x branch if you would prefer. Do we expect that there will be a lot of changes applied to the 3.x that need to be merged up to 4.x? I would imagine that there will not be very many such changes.

[jrfnl]

Thought: should this be pulled to the 3.x branch instead of 4.x branch ? I wonder how much having this change only in 4.x will complicate merge-ups.

I did a quick check by trying to cherry-pick this commit back to the 3.x branch.

I can resolve these and target the 3.x branch if you would prefer. Do we expect that there will be a lot of changes applied to the 3.x that need to be merged up to 4.x? I would imagine that there will not be very many such changes.

There shouldn't be many things still going into the 3.x branch (security, runtime PHP for new PHP versions and keeping CI running).

Thinking this over some more, chances of anything changing in the bash based tests in the 3.x branch over the next year or so are slim, so let's go for it as-is.

Thanks for the reality-check.

[jrfnl]

Thanks @fredden !