On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 05:10:45PM +0200, Marco Hugentobler wrote: > > branch > > write tests > > work > > request for merge > > integrate > > For me, this workflow is fine in case of new features. For smaller changes or > quick bugfixes, it seems unhandy to always write a unit test for it.
I think tests for bugfixes are really important as they become a warranty that the bug you'll be spending time on won't come back in the future. I don't have a long file of qgis contributions, but the few (single?) bug I contributed a patch for appeared a few weeks later (the line orientation detection code). It's been _very_ frustrating. If providing a test is unhandy it may mean writing a test is too hard and should be made simpler. Writing a test for a bug should really be the first stage of bug handling, it's very like asking the reporter "can you reproduce the bug?". Only translating that reproducability in code, which then becomes _the_ test for that bug, linking to ticket. --strk; () Free GIS & Flash consultant/developer /\ http://strk.keybit.net/services.html _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer