On 7 Mar 2007, at 13:48, Eric Hacker wrote:
I think it was Ovid who recently called it the Test Anything Protocol. If really what is desired, then some additional complexity is required.
Sure - I'm completely in favour of being able to test anything and capture everything that might be useful. But if we want more nuanced exit information (did the test even run? did a connection fail?) we could still capture that without having to massage everything into HTTP style status codes.
I'm not /strongly/ opposed to your proposal - just trying to understand what it might do that we can't do more simply by other means.
-- Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
