Hi all! Thanks everybody for the answers, next patches I submit will have accompanying unit tests.
Regards, Carlos On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Donald Woods <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm all for adding additional junits, even if they duplicate scenarios > covered by the TCK (as long as we're not cut-n-pasting code from the TCK > into our svn.) Thought being, that we would be allowing contributors > who are generating patches to possibly catch some regressions, without > expecting everyone to always setup and run the TCK before checking in > changes. > > > -Donald > > > On 4/21/10 11:57 AM, Carlos Vara wrote: > > Hi all! > > > > Currently I am submitting patches to try to pass more TCK tests, and I'm > not > > sure if I should enclose unit tests along with the patches. > > > > Basically, if tests are added, they will probably be a replication of the > > tests already available in the TCK, and having duplicated code isn't > good. > > On the other hand, maybe you value having more "own" test coverage and > you > > don't want or prefer not to rely on the TCK to ensure proper behavior. > > > > Please, let me know what you prefer, as by my side it is no problem at > all > > to add unit tests. > > > > Regards, > > Carlos > > >
