RetroSearch Browse

Mon Jan 10 20:29:30 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-January/107378.html

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 21:11:23 +0200
Eli Bendersky <eliben at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I would like to advocate again for the removal of the "unit test
> > needed" stage on the tracker, which regularly confuses our triagers
> > into thinking it's an actual requirement or expectation from
> > contributors and bug reporters.
> >
> >
> Perhaps a different wording would be preferred to removal. Suppose a
> reviewer accepts a patch but asks for a test before committing it. If it's
> hidden in the issue discussion, only those involved in the issue are aware
> of the situation. If it's in the issue state, then other potential
> contributors may notice it and provide tests. IMHO tests are simpler and
> less "scary" for newbies making their first steps in CPython.

Then we would need a whole array of checkboxes for things missing in a
patch:
- missing unit test
- missing documentation changes
- other things?

I don't think it's useful. As for "tests are simpler", it really depends
on the issue :) I've worked on many issues where writing the test took
much more time than actually fixing the bug (one-line fix vs. careful
test setup to exercise the fix).

(also, as a matter of principle, I think it's better that the same
person who wrote the bugfix is asked to write the tests)

Regards

Antoine.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-January/107378.html below:

[Python-Dev] "unit test needed"