Andrea Aime wrote: > Justin Deoliveira ha scritto: >> Hi all, >> >> The idea of a datastore compliance test has been kicking around for some >> time now. The idea is to create an abstract test case which tests all >> aspects of the datastore api, and then subclass for each data store. >> >> Jody implemented such a test for memory data store some time back. I >> ported the test to postgis and it cleared up a lot of bugs. >> >> As part of a recent experiment I have created such a test case, and have >> three implementations: postgis, shapefile, and property. >> >> I would like to create a new module, lets call it "cite", and put all >> the tests in there. My rational for the new module is that the tests are >> less likey to get kicked out of the build as somoene is developing in a >> module. >> >> Also having the tests in a single module gives us a quick way to tell >> which modules are not compliant. >> >> What do people think? > > That this approach prevents us from having a coverage report out of these > tests... also, I don't understand the rationale about being kicked out of > the build, do you mean that the test module won't be part of the build? > What I meant is that if you look at a lot of the data store pom files, tests are commented out so they don't run. This often happens as a result of someone developing on a module and not wanting to deal with testing. So teh tests temporarily get disabled, never to return.
> So far, modules that have been kicked out of the build were without a > mantainer, > so they were rightfully kicked out in my opinion. The only things that > makes me think is that, for example, Oracle is an important module and > basically > none of the core developers replaced the missing mantainer, as a result the > module has been out of the build for long time... > A choice between releasing without an important module, or releasing with a > broken one is not easy, but I'd choose with not releasing it, otherwise how > can we deal with our quality problems? > If some external project feels that an important module should be back in the > build, has to go and fix it instead of ignoring the issues... I could go either way, separate module or not. Both have pros and cons in my mind. Lets see what others think. > > Cheers > Andrea > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Geotools-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel > > !DSPAM:1004,451809ce107401702038478! > -- Justin Deoliveira [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Open Planning Project http://topp.openplans.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
