Yeah...I'm more amendable to this proposal. I just don't see tests being separated from the source release. In fact, I see a lot of problems with matching versions and releases.
I still question the value of separating out a framework where both ends (tests and the server it tests) stay in the same repo but I guess there should be no harm. I do think our time can be better spent elsewhere (for example, writing the tests) but, if others see it as necessary, I wouldn't be against it. @Edison I can do what you said now. To me that's more or less maven changes and build changes. Not a repo/separate release question. --Alex > IMO, we should consider Marvin the "framework" to be the thing to break > out, and the tests should be different from the framework. > > Now that leads to the question: to test or not to test (in the main repo)? > > I'd suggest that *tests* belong in the main repo, because they are tied to the > software's capabilities and versions. > > The Marvin framework, on the other hand, since the re-work that Prasanna > did, is mostly distinct (and uses API discovery). > > Anyone else agree?
