On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 12:04 PM Florian Bruhin <[email protected]> wrote:
> * Ronny Pfannschmidt <[email protected]> [2016-01-25 > 14:36:12 +0100]: > > i think we need to be much more strict on what a bugfix is > > for example the regression in 2.8.6 was caused by the "feature" > > of more detailed exceptions from monkeypatch > > I agree this particular PR should've gone to 'features'. IMHO it'd > have been the responsibility of Bruno and you to tell the author to > reopen it against features. > Yes, it seemed like a small fix at the time, that's why it went into master... I agree we should be more strict on what goes to master in the future. But in general I think it's working pretty well, no? > I agree... we just have to adjust to those hiccups. > another more and more apparent issue is, that our current testsuite > > and style of testing in pytest can't provide sufficient branch > > coverage in various situations, the regression that happened in > > 2.8.6 should have been something the testsuite catches before. > > I was surprised this wasn't caught as well - then again pytest's > coverage is at 93% according to coveralls, which doesn't seem too > shabby to me. > I think much of what is missing is because of poor coverage in genscript.py... didn't take a deeper look if it is possible to improve that. > to that effect it might even be sensible to change from master + > > features to bugfix + master > > I thought we discussed this to death before already, and ended up with > master/features :P > I agree, I don't think the reasons for the master/feature division have changed: mainly that most external contributions are bug fixes or doc-changes, so it's natural for contributors to target the master branch. Features are much more rare, so for those we have a different branch other than the default. Bruno.
_______________________________________________ pytest-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pytest-dev
