On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Damien Katz <[email protected]> wrote: > So based on the responses, it looks like we need fully automated tests, > runnable without the browser. And Erlang unit test integration. > > Also people like running the tests in the browser and want even better > integration for creating new tests. I see no reason we cannot have both. > Chris Anderson has done a lot of work here already. > > Looks like couch.js is fine as is. > > Paul, I'm not sure why you object to long test names, but I do like the idea > of tags for tests. Each test could be tagged for important functionality > they test and use: replication, security, views, temp views, compaction, > etc. That it makes it easy to quickly run all the tests touching certain > features while you are developing. As the number of tests grow, this will > become more useful IMO. > > -Damien >
Damien, Long test names fail to pass my cost/benefit analysis. The awesomeness of tags would be highly dependent on implementation. HTH, Paul Davis
