On 02/27/2013 02:48 PM, Graham TerMarsch wrote: > On February 27, 2013 09:06:23 AM Mark Stosberg wrote: >> What are some suggestions to make sure that passing TODO tests get >> regular attention? >> > [.....snip.....] >> >> In case this context matters-- our tests are regularly through Jenkins, >> so our TAP is getting converted to JUnit. We also run tests from the >> command line with prove regularly as well. > > Mark, what are you using to convert your TAP to JUnit? > > I ask as TAP::Formatter::JUnit automatically treats "passing TODOs" as > "failures" and reports them as such in the JUnit output.
I use "TAP::Harness::JUnit", only because I got it working, and it works well enough. Thanks for highlighting this feature of TAP::Formatter::JUnit. I'll have to give it another look. When I looked at one one of my passing TODO tests, I found that it marked as a TODO, because sometimes the test data it was working with would be in the desired state, and sometimes it wouldn't be. So, it wasn't a simply matter of of un-TODO'ing the test in that case, as it would still fail sometimes. In a case like that, I have to re-work the test so that it has sufficient control over the test data to give consistent results. Perhaps that test would be better written to "SKIP" if the data isn't working with isn't in a state for the test to be meaningful. Mark
