This looks good to me, just a couple things. What is the logic behind naming the directory for the runtime resources 'rsc'? I think something clearer should be used for that. Also, I'm not sure we need to have unit or functional tests for crossedit, and there probably isn't much of it anyways that one could write unit tests for as most of it to my understanding is GUI code, and glue code to the common directory. Also in terms of step 2 for dealing with bugs, I believe that even if it is reported on sourceforge, it may be helpful to still include a comment at the top of what the bug is, possibly copied from the sourceforge tracker's summary. I'm also wondering what sort of unit tests one could have for 'headers', that doesn't seem very clear to me. Another point, is some functional tests, could very well combine multiple parts of the server code, such as 'server' and 'common', or 'socket' and 'server'. It is difficult to make a clear separation for most functional tests.
Alex Schultz tchize wrote: >Hello, > >I have wrote draft documentation on testing. This will serve as a guide line >on implementing unit testing in crossfire. >All comment from community welcomed. Note, as nobody did come with other >suggestiong i went on the use of check > >Regards, >Tchize > > <snip> _______________________________________________ crossfire mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
