Rich Burridge wrote:
Brock Pytlik wrote:
Could you be more specific please. Knowing that it'll now fall back
to the
"description" lines, what changes to what tests in what files would
you like
to see?
I'd like to see a test case that didn't depend on the fall back
behavior to succeed, so a test where summary was set. I'd also like
to see one where both description and summary were set to make sure
the right choice is made.
Okay, I've added those in.
New webrev at:
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~richb/pkg-4395-8829-v5/
Note that I couldn't do something like:
self.assert_(res.description == "DESCRIPTION: Example Package 6")
in the "example_pkg6" section, because "description" isn't a
valid field in the PackageInfo class in
.../gate/src/modules/client/api.py
(around lines 1685-1716).
Should this be changed?
Thanks.
Hmm. I think it depends on whether we're totally deprecating the
description field, or if the summary and description fields are both
going to remain, but should be different things. If we're totally
deprecating, then it's fine for PackageInfo not to have a description
entry. If we want both around, but with different values, then
PackageInfo should expose that.
From a sample size of one (but a good sample since it was Danek), it
sounds like we're going to want to have both in a package. The
description will be storing the long description of the package. So,
PackageInfo should probably present both to the world.
Brock
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
