On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 09:30:24PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 08:19:43PM +0000, Thomas Adam wrote:
> > Now that fvwm-convert-2.6 is underway, and attempts to do something vaguely
> > useful, I am aware that I will have to look at the purify tests we have and
> > update them to bring them inline with all the new features FVWM 2.5.X has.
> > 
> > This is no small task -- so before I think about doing it:
> > 
> > * Is it worth me at all even bothering?  We've had so many new features, and
> >   yet almost no one has ever updated these tests when that feature has been
> >   added.
> > 
> > * If there were any regressions from new features which didn't have any
> >   corresponding purify tests, someone would have said so by now.
> > 
> > Something needs doing to these though to help push towards FVWM 2.6.0 -- I
> > don't mind doing the work, I am just curious to know if we should for a
> > stable release.  If not, which areas are worth concentrating more on?  The
> > style section alone would take me ages, for instance.  :P
> 
> I tried to cover most of the existing functionality and syntax in
> an aggressive way, when I wrote these tests.  Of course they don't
> cover any new features, and I think adding tests is a good thing.

So, "yes".  :)  OK, I'll make a start on that then.

-- Thomas Adam

-- 
"It was the cruelest game I've ever played and it's played inside my head."
-- "Hush The Warmth", Gorky's Zygotic Mynci.

Reply via email to