I'd rather have O(1) hand-crafted wc's than all 950 wc's the test suite generates, of which likely 99% are 'normal'... (especially as it's the end-of-run state, after any conflicts have been resolved etc)
Greg Stein wrote on Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 05:47:36 -0400: > I took the 1.6.x branch and ran the test suite. It produced about 950 > working copies, and the (compressed) tarball sits at about 850k. I'm > thinking about recording 'svn status' for each working copy, and > checking the tarball in as test data. We can then run an 'svn upgrade' > on each working copy, then 'svn status', and verify that the two > status results match. (caveat minor improvements in state tracking and > status reporting) > > But... running upgrade on about 950 working copies and checking their > status isn't cheap. The tarball sizes don't bother me too much... I'm > more concerned about test suite runtime. > > Anybody else? Should this be "normal test run"? Or should we set up an > "extended" set of tests and drop this into that batch? > > Or not even go with this approach?