This is a bit of a social norms thread.... I've been consistently asking for tests in reviews for a while now, and I get the occasional push-back. I think this falls into a few broad camps:
A - there is no test suite at all, adding one in unreasonable B - this thing cannot be tested in this context (e.g. functional tests are defined in a different tree) C - this particular thing is very hard to test D - testing this won't offer benefit E - other things like this in the project don't have tests F - submitter doesn't know how to write tests G - submitter doesn't have time to write tests Now, of these, I think it's fine not add tests in cases A, B, C in combination with D, and D. I don't think E, F or G are sufficient reasons to merge something without tests, when reviewers are asking for them. G in the special case that the project really wants the patch landed - but then I'd expect reviewers to not ask for tests or to volunteer that they might be optional. Now, if I'm wrong, and folk have different norms about when to accept 'reason X not to write tests' as a response from the submitter - please let me know! -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
