Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Ryan Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think the hardest >> part is going to be keeping the tests up to date with the code. >> > > That's pretty easy -- just have Code Review complain whenever anyone > causes a test failure, and force them to fix the tests they broke or > get reverted. This assumes that it's easy to look at the changed > output and change the test so it's marked correct, though. That seems > like it *should* be the case, at a glance, if the tests are > well-written. >
I'd encourage folks to start small with this. One of the common failure modes of projects adopting automated end-to-end tests (like Selenium) is that somebody divorced from the development process makes a bunch of tests, often with playback and record tools. As developers change things, they have a hard time figuring out what tests mean or how to update them; that can either reduce commits or encourage people to disable tests rather than updating them. I say this not to discourage the effort; I'm a huge fan of automated tests. I just think that to maximize the chance of success, it's better for the early focus to be on utility and sustainability rather than maximum test coverage. William _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
