May I file 1000 bugs aka upstream test suite tracking

drago01 drago01 at gmail.com
Sun Feb 23 12:32:46 UTC 2014


On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:
> On 02/23/2014 12:14 PM, drago01 wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/22/2014 07:34 PM, drago01 wrote:
>>>
>>>> And running tests at build time is a kludge anyway building has
>>>> nothing to do with testing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, a lot of people will disagree with this claim.
>>
>>
>> Sure a lot of people disagree with a lot of things.
>>
>>> Testing as part of building (running a package's testsuite) can cover a
>>> lot
>>> of cases, but is a subset of general testing.
>>
>>
>> I didn't say it cannot cover cases (in fact it does). It is just the
>> wrong point where it should be run.
>
>
> I have to disagree with you again.
>
> The best place to implement a package's self test is within the package, by
> the package authors. This is common practice for ages and has been exercised
> 1000's of times.

1. I did not state where the test is just where (or better) *when* it
should run.
2. Package authors rarely do anything other then ... package ... (99%
of the test cases are not "implemented by the package authors")

> I regret, but denying this consideration is just evidence of lack of
> experience.

No you seem to not understand my point.

>
>> We do it due to lack of better
>> infrastructure.
>
> Sure one can add additonal tests at various levels outside of a package, but
> this doesn't invalidate what I wrote above.

As stated above you missed the point. Building a package means well
building it not test it.


More information about the test mailing list