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.



Reply via email to