Hey Brett, > There is also the PQM suggestion to make sure we always at least > have some general sanity in the code base. But a PQM system would > probably only work once the test suite is not flaky anymore as > having some typo in a comment be rejected because test_kqueue failed > again is not going to go over well with most people.
That's true, but these tests should actually be disabled or fixed. There's no point in having a test that everyone finds "ok" to have it broken. > And that also goes for OS-specific failures on a platform I am not > running on. Honestly the PQM system probably wouldn't be necessary > if people just ran the entire test suite before a checkin. And if The reason to use PQM is precisely so that your commit *does* break when you create breakage in a platform you're not running on. Even though you might not care about breaking someone else's environment, I believe it's in the best interest of everyone that this doesn't ever happen in the main line of development. Note that I'm playing devil's advocate here. Just like everyone else, I do enjoy being able to commit straight to the repository and seeing my changes there. On the other hand, in a complex environment where several developers and multiple platforms are involved, the only way to bring constant stability in is to penalize those that cause breakage. -- Gustavo Niemeyer http://niemeyer.net _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers