On 06/18/2014 08:35 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
On 18 June 2014 15:28, Matthew Booth <[email protected]> wrote:
The answer is not always more
review: there are other tools in the box. Imagine we spent 50% of the
time we spend on review writing tempest tests instead.
Or we push the work off of core into the wider community and require
100% unit test coverage of every change *and* record the tempest
coverage of any changed lines so that the reviewer can gauge better
what the risks are?
100% coverage is not realistic.
How would you handle bugfixes that depend on specific databases?
How would you handle bugs in the unit tests themselves? (Like 1298690
where the sqlite database used for unit tests handles regexp()
differently than either mysql or postgres.)
Chris
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
