Re: Mauve test question

[Michael Koch]

Am Dienstag, 28. Dezember 2004 17:40 schrieb Archie Cobbs:
> Jeroen Frijters wrote:
> >>The problem with that approach is that if someone adds a new test
> >>to Mauve, it doesn't automatically get added to our "white list".
> >
> > That's a feature, not a bug! In practice new tests often get
> > added that don't yet run without failures (and this is the right
> > thing to do). So I strongly believe we should work with a white
> > list.
>
> Huh? Why is adding broken tests the right thing to do? And besides,
> if a broken test is added, this way there will be motivation to
> resolve the discrepancy. With a whitelist, a broken test can get
> added but no one will notice and then it just sits there getting
> stale.

Its common practise to add new code to one implementation, e.g GNU 
classpath or libgcj, and test it for a while and later merge it to 
kaffe. According to you the mauve tests don't need to be added before 
it's included in all implementations because nothing may be broken.


Michael 
-- 
Homepage: http://www.worldforge.org/