Thanks for all the input. I'm going to attempt to write a draft
outlining the goals and basic design this weekend.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 11:24:59PM -0500, Jeff Urlwin wrote:
>
> > > Just my initial thought. An intended SCOPE would be nice
> > for those of
> > > us who would like to contribu
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 02:02:45PM -0500, Jeff Urlwin wrote:
>
> I, actually, think the "Driver" test would be more useful for Driver writers
I would definitely appreciate a framework that would be testing
individual DBI features of the driver. It would be up to the driver
author to specify which
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 11:24:59PM -0500, Jeff Urlwin wrote:
>
> > > The "Driver" test would, IMHO, be VERY dependant upon the
> > conformance
> > > tests, to know what to test and to know how to approach inserts,
> > > deletes, etc.
> >
> > What do you mean by "how to approach inserts ..."?
>
>
> My initial purpose for suggesting such a test suite was the
> initial difficulty I had when I first wrote a DBD: docs were pretty
> thin, and there was a lot of painful trial and error. And I'm
> certain I'm *still* not in conformance in a lot of places
> (esp. as DBI API changes roll out)
>
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 02:02:45PM -0500, Jeff Urlwin wrote:
> > My initial input would be:
> >
> > Ensure that we have proper goals!!!
> >
> > Is this going to be a DBI conformance test or a driver test
> suite? I
> > belive those are two different (but not incompatible) goals.
>
> Ulti
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 12:33:58AM +0100, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Thu 22 Jan 2004 20:02, "Jeff Urlwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My initial input would be:
> >
> > Ensure that we have proper goals!!!
>
> Reading this, and Tim and Dean's comments, I'm sure it will give another
> throttle t
On Thu 22 Jan 2004 20:02, "Jeff Urlwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My initial input would be:
>
> Ensure that we have proper goals!!!
Reading this, and Tim and Dean's comments, I'm sure it will give another
throttle to the time I will spend in improving my DBD
I'm realy looking forward in *usi
> My initial input would be:
>
> Ensure that we have proper goals!!!
>
> Is this going to be a DBI conformance test or a driver test suite? I belive
> those are two different (but not incompatible) goals. A conformance test
> would be more simple, in that it would test the interface to the drive
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 02:02:45PM -0500, Jeff Urlwin wrote:
> My initial input would be:
>
> Ensure that we have proper goals!!!
>
> Is this going to be a DBI conformance test or a driver test suite? I belive
> those are two different (but not incompatible) goals.
Ultimately both, I hope, thoug
My initial input would be:
Ensure that we have proper goals!!!
Is this going to be a DBI conformance test or a driver test suite? I belive
those are two different (but not incompatible) goals. A conformance test
would be more simple, in that it would test the interface to the driver not
necessar
10 matches
Mail list logo