On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 20:04, Luke Kanies <[email protected]> wrote:
> Comment below.
>
> On Feb 12, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Daniel Pittman wrote:
>
>> From: Daniel Pittman <[email protected]>
[...]
> This is generally how I've run these tests, but I've generally preferred a
> test per item - that way you get a more informed failure when there's a
> problem. E.g., you get "cert was not in application list" instead of
> "expected true but got false". This test is now stable, but failures won't
> be very readable.
The purpose of the test is to verify that puppet does the right thing
when it has multiple locations for applications on the Ruby load path
– not to verify the presence or absence of core applications. Those
are checked to verify, in essence, the sanity of the test before we
run the real one.
So, I agree with your assessment, but I think it is kind of a
distraction from the main purpose. Is that reasonable? It wouldn't
be hard to revisit this and correct it...
Regards,
Daniel
--
⎋ Puppet Labs Developer – http://puppetlabs.com
✉ Daniel Pittman <[email protected]>
✆ Contact me via gtalk, email, or phone: +1 (877) 575-9775
♲ Made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
