On Monday 10 August 2009 22:55:02 William Grant wrote: > On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:04 +0100, Julian Edwards wrote: > > Why not put all those tests in this new file? I found it confusing to > > see them in two places. > > > > Ideally I'd like to split up xx-archive.txt more anyway, it's way too > > big! We could at least have xx-archive-permissions.txt, > > xx-archive-copying.txt and xx- archive-subscriptions.txt ! > > It's because it's so big that it got bigger. I followed the example of > the existing types of tests that you mention there, and added the new > ones underneath. It should be split up, you're right.
I had an interesting call with Celso yesterday about this. I was advocating smaller, more focused page test files. He said that because we have custom "get" methods on IArchive to retrieve related objects, we should test those in xx-archive.txt. However, if we split out the related objects into separate browser tests, then it's very likely we'll end up with repeated calls to the same get method which is not nice for our test suite run time, not to mention introducing redundancy. So, how about we mention the custom method in the commentary of xx- archive.txt, and then refer the reader to a different file where it's fully tested? (I wonder if there's any ReST markup for this?) _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
