Hello, Michael Hind wrote: > As I mentioned on #parrot, I was actually appalled, that we had a > situation that rakudo and partcl failed to build (Segmentation fault) > and cardinal built but aborted make test and the only indication on > parrot was that one test failed, not even a mainstream test, but ONE of > the many examples_tests (which are only run under make fulltest).
... which is why a policy as we're trying to establish it now is a good idea. > 2009/8/26 Will Coleda <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > We should be following rakudo's example of not closing tickets for > which tests could be written. > > We could abuse the existing trac fields we have to help track this > status, or we could add a new "Tests" field, with "needs, has, can't, > <null>" > > Moritz has suggested we should additionally track the name of the > test file. Note that this doesn't have to be in a special as meta data. It's useful to have the status as a new field to make it easy to search for tickets that needs tests, for example; but presumably nobody wants to write queries which work on particular test file names. > Throwing to the list for discussion; I'll get OSU to update our trac > instance if it turns out we decide we need new field(s) for this. Cheers, Moritz _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
