Are we really going to bike shed the name of the test file? Although I'll admit tests.jl seems like a more tradional sort of name. I didn't change much from the Julia-created package framework.
Relatedly, it would have been nice if the default travis file worked on Julia-0.2, since I had done the work to get everything else working there. On Friday, May 23, 2014, Steven G. Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Friday, May 23, 2014 2:13:00 PM UTC-4, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >> >> Looking at this, it occurs to me that since all the tests are just in the >> test/runtests.jl file, and this is probably a pretty common case, maybe the >> name of that file is a little unfortunate. It's a good name if there are a >> ton of tests in lots of files and ways to run various subsets of them, but >> it's probably pretty common, especially initially, for a package to just >> have one test file like this. Calling it test/tests.jl might be better? >> > > Shorter is better, but I don't care all that much. >
