https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5855
--- Comment #4 from Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-14 08:53:04 PST
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I'm a little torn on this one.
>
> I agree that our test suite take awhile to run, but some of the things it runs
> will show problems on a users system before they install. Now if we skip
> those
> tests and they run make test and all is fine, but say bayesdbm doesn't really
> work, you're going to be creating a support nightmare.
I'd be fine with "rescuing" a few of those back into the on-by-default test
set; maybe these?
t/bayesdbm.t
t/bayessdbm.t
t/db_based_whitelist.t
t/trust_path.t
t/whitelist_from.t
they seem to be a good selection of feature coverage. WDYT?
> Suggest that instead of a total skip, we move very basic tests to the front of
> the tests and run a smaller subset, and not the entire test.
well, it's easier to either run or not-run an entire .t script. It's also hard
to see if a test was partially run from the "overview" view, ie the one that
looks like this:
t/foo............................ok
t/bar............................ok
t/baz............................ok
If "t/bar" exited early after testing half of the features, it's not easy to
tell that.
What we could do, is split long-running scripts into 2 scripts, with the first
one being the "quick" bit ("t/bar_quick") and the second being the "slow"
remainder ("t/bar_full"). I'd be fine with that.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
