Hi Aaron, On 11-11-2020 20:11, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > Hi Aaron, > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 7:02 PM Aaron Zauner (azet) <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hey, >> >> That command does load everything that lmod needs in terms of dependencies >> and checks the environment. It's not a proper test suite but none exists so >> far, and I think this is sufficient to see if there's any bugs related to >> dependencies or the main function of the tool. writing a empty module to >> test lmod won't be any more effective.
I have no clue what lmod does. > I think what you said exactly matches my description in the bug. :) So do I. >>> Executing that command is considered to be a trivial test, which >>> does not provide significant coverage for a package as a whole. >>> But these tests are a useful way to detect regressions in dependencies >>> and prevent them from breaking your package. > >> >> If you can find a better alternative I'm all in, this was the best I could >> come up with when packaging initially. If you still think it should be >> marked superficial please do so. So, can you elaborate why you think that this test is substantially testing your package. E.g. we have (for now) accepted that meta packages actually do not much more than testing dependencies? But e.g. Python modules or Node modules that just do an include are superficial. And so are all tests that just print the version number although that "load everything that X needs in terms of dependencies". These tests are valuable, except they are not enough to warrant the exception that we are giving packages with non-superficial tests during regular migration (reduced age) and the bullseye freeze (longer period of uploading without needing the release team). Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
