On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 08:40:27AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> I'm still concerned here about the possibility of patches that are
> 'simply' refactorings of the code, where the only possible test is
> 'All the existing tests give the same result, but the code is more
> readable and easier to extend', with the second clause being a bit
> hard to test in an automated fashion.
As with all things in life, exceptions will be made. No need to try
and nail down all possible cases now. The important thing is that the
default is to put a hold on anything which doesn't have an associated
testing patch as opposed to the current situation (patch now, test
later).
--
Michael G Schwern http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just Another Stupid Consultant Perl6 Kwalitee Ashuranse
turds slide easily
spooge the paste into my crack
poop falls free no more
-- Schwern
