>Instead someone should fix the bugs. Well, yes, that is ideal.. but if that doesnt happen, then you are left with the possibility that regressions get into the codebase when people cant answer "Do all tests that are SUPPOSED TO PASS, continue to pass after my fix?"
And we've seen that happen to POI in the last year that we've had breakage in HEAD.. it really affects development velocity when you cant answer the above question confidently! I've tried to find a middle path in the current build.xml that i just checked in . Regards - Avik On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 22:36 +0200, Rainer Klute wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 20.04.2005, 23:17 +0530 schrieb > [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > Ok, thanks. That makes sense. Do you have a bug he for this? I'll update > > the code with that. In any event i think we should not run known failing > > tests by default, it can hide other breakage. I've been thinking of a way > > to keep them separately in cvs; for now i'll disable them.Quoting Rainer > > Klute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Its bug 11744. However, I think we should never leave out any testcases! > Omitting failing testcases contradicts the whole sense of testing. > Instead someone should fix the bugs. > > Best regards > Rainer Klute > > Rainer Klute IT-Consulting GmbH > Dipl.-Inform. > Rainer Klute E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Körner Grund 24 Telefon: +49 172 2324824 > D-44143 Dortmund Telefax: +49 231 5349423 > > Inhibit software patents: http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mailing List: http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail2.html#poi > The Apache Jakarta POI Project: http://jakarta.apache.org/poi/ > -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mailing List: http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mail2.html#poi The Apache Jakarta POI Project: http://jakarta.apache.org/poi/
