Martin Ågren <martin.ag...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 19 February 2018 at 22:29, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
> ...
>> Or alternatively, we could just not bother with checking this into the
>> repository, and it becomes a local thing for people interested in
>> leak-testing. What's the value in having a shared known-leaky list,
>> especially if we don't expect most people to run it.
>
> This sums up my feeling about this.
Even though keeping track of list of known-leaky tests may not be so
interesting, we can still salvage useful pieces from the discussion
and make them available to developers, e.g. something like
prove --dry --state=failed |
perl -lne '/^(t[0-9]{4})-.*\.sh$/ and print $1' | sort >$@+
if cmp >/dev/null $@ $@+; then rm $@+; else mv $@+ $@; fi
could be made into a target to stash away the list of failing tests
after a test run?
