On 24 Jan 2011, at 23:17, Glenn Adams wrote: Hi Glenn
> Is there a reason why *all* bug fixes are not accompanied by one or more new > test cases that demonstrate the presence and absence of the bug before and > after the fix? Adding such test cases should be mandatory for all bug fix > commits. I wouldn't quite go that far for performance and clean up fixes, > however, but for legitimate bugs, there should be a reliable way to ensure > that (1) the bug and its fix are testable and (2) that future regressions do > not occur. I realize it takes more effort, but it is worth it in the long > term, both in actual improvements in quality and the ability to demonstrate > consistently good practice to maintain that quality. FWIW, in case you are referring to some of my recent commits... Any specific ones I should be taking a look at? Just following old habits, I'm afraid, and try to add tests wherever appropriate, even if the fix affects only a single line of code. Performance fixes may be rather difficult to test for, but even then one could conjure up a way to test whether adding nodes remains a linear operation, for example. We have no real framework set up for that type of thing, but I guess I could invest some time in that. > > Many Apache projects require this process be followed; I would urge the FOP > project to adopt a similar criterion for bug fix commits. > Basically agreed with your viewpoint, so point out where exactly you feel something was missing and I'll see if I can accommodate you. Regards, Andreas ---
