> > All this talk about 'reliable code for our users' is total BS until
> > 'make check' actually does some realisitic functionality tests.
> > If you can't write an automated test for a feature, they I would
> > request we consider disabling that feature.

I'm not sure this is a realistic goal in a single machine environment. For a 
realistic testing environment, you need at least 10 system images (and the 
ability to create a lot more would be very desirable for some of the subtler 
bugs), and the ability to control time and replay multiple streams of events in 
a repeatable way. It involves a separate Kerberos infrastructure, and a lot of 
other moving parts, plus a lot of scripting to build the environment , run the 
test, and then reset the environment for the next run. You also need different 
types of systems, different OS levels, etc which complicate the test even 
further.
 
It's not impossible, but I can say that it cost a fair amount (in the 
mid-to-high 5 digit range) to build that environment here. 
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info

Reply via email to