On 1/16/07, Greg Lindstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip> > > > > Not to mention that I doubt you have time to do 100% coverage of > > > the test cases that you have come up with (scriptable or otherwise, > > > unit or otherwise) before making a commit to the trunk. I'd expect > > > that your coverage percentage is different based on what type of > > > change you're committing, and I'd expect that you have different > > > percentages for when you are preparing an official release. > > > > Be realistic. Just because there isn't 100% coverage and 100% > > thoroughness and 100% exactness, etc., doesn't mean that things don't > > get tested sufficiently to determine if they work. There are > > certainly edge cases that slip by, and these are fixed as soon as > > they are noted. > > > That's how it's suppose to work. If some pathological case gets through, we > write a new test to catch it, then fix the code and verify it with *ALL* of > the previous tests (plus the new test). Over time, we have developed a test > suite with hundreds of tests cases. Sounds like you have it right, Ed. > --greg
He originally stated that he expected everyone to run every possible combination of inputs before committing a change but later clarified this and described a process with a limited set of tests that had to pass before something is committed to the trunk. His first statement was unreasonable. I objected. The clarification was reasonable. -- sheila _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
