On 22 Apr. 2017 4:23 am, "Tom Lane" <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 4/21/17 14:49, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> I'll add a comment, but doing it in PostgresNode.pm would mean jacana
>> (for instance) couldn't run any of the TAP tests. I'mm looking at
>> installing a sufficiently modern Test::Simple package (includes
>> Test::More and test::Build) there, but other oldish machines could also
>> be affected.
> Or you could define note() as an empty function if it doesn't exist.
+1. I'm really not at all happy with the prospect that every time
somebody adds a use of "note" to some new TAP test, we're going to
get a complaint later that that test no longer works on jacana.
We need to either decide that non-ancient Test::More is a hard
requirement for all the tests
That seems like a no-brainer TBH. Why are we bothering with backwards
compat with ancient versions of test frameworks? It seems like a colossal
waste of time for no benefit.
or fix things with a centralized
solution. A dummy (or not so dummy?) implementation would serve
for the latter.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
