I don't want to lose track of the original idea from François, so let's do this formally in preparation for a vote. Having this all in place will make transition to new testing infrastructure more goal-oriented and keep us more focused moving forward.
Does anybody have specific feedback/discussion points on the following (awesome, IMO) proposal: Principles: 1. Tests always pass. This is the starting point. If we don't care about test failures, then we should stop writing tests. A recurring failing test carries no signal and is better deleted. 2. The code is tested. Assuming we can align on these principles, here is a proposal for their implementation. Rules: 1. Each new release passes all tests (no flakinesss). 2. If a patch has a failing test (test touching the same code path), the code or test should be fixed prior to being accepted. 3. Bugs fixes should have one test that fails prior to the fix and passes after fix. 4. New code should have at least 90% test coverage.
