On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 17:27 +0100, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:19:53AM -0500, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > Yet, it's the core developers who will likely be called in to answer > > "hey my build failed with this python test, tell me what's wrong!!!" > > In subsequentcheck? If that should indeed be the case even then, we can make a > separate "make pythoncheck" target. > > > Now you are the one being academic here. Stick to the topic please, > > which is whether or not Python tests should be used to test core > > functionality. Nobody is talking about boost here. > > I am talking about testing the _product_ here.
And I'm talking about what tools should be used to test what part of the product. I think you are at one level above us. No wonder we are talking past each other. > > But to answer that question, if we discover a bug in boost, that should > > be fixed and tested in the boost project. Not us. > > A bug in boost is a bug in LibreOffice. At least on Windows, but for TDF > builds > also elsewhere. And a test that finds a bug is still a good test, even if it > wasnt written for that. Oh, so we volunteer to carry the burden of testing all 3rd party libraries that we ship with? A worthy goal indeed but is that really practical? Kohei _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
