Suppose I'm fixing a bug in the library. I want peer review for my fix, but I need none for my new "would have caught" test cases. Is it considered alright to check-in right away the test case, breaking the test suite, and to upload a patch to SF to fix it? Or should the patch include the new test cases? The XP answer would be "hey, you have to checkin the breaking test case right away", and I'm inclined to agree. I really want to break the standard library, just because I'm a sadist -- but seriously, we need tests that break more often, so bugs will be easier to fix. waiting-for-fellow-sadists-ly y'rs, Z. -- Moshe Zadka <moshez@math.huji.ac.il> There is no IGLU cabal. http://advogato.org/person/moshez
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4