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. -Archie __________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * CTO, Awarix * http://www.awarix.com * Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. * _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
