On Saturday 19 January 2013 18:19:03 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Divendres, 18 de gener de 2013, a les 18:58:07, Martin Gräßlin va escriure: > > On Tuesday 15 January 2013 23:27:53 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > 4) Don't release if any if the tests are failing in builds.kde.org > > > > > > If we have tests, they have to work > > > > I have mixed feelings about that. Personally I agree completely, but I > > fear > > that this will end in less unit tests than in more. If you have unit tests > > and they have been broken for a long time you get punished, > > Right, but why would you have a broken unit test? The only reason i can > think of is that you know your code is broken but don't have time, etc to > fix it yet. If that's the case i'd suggest using QEXPECT_FAIL maybe? my code works :-)
I actually had a look into two of the three failing tests and wanted to fix them. But did not understand the foreign code base good enough to investigate it properly. So I don't know whether this is an expected fail (given the commit message which introduced the tests which are failing I doubt it) or not. Those two are at least failing since I started looking at build.kde.org. Probably nobody cares :-( For the third test I informed the maintainer that it started to fail. -- Martin Gräßlin
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ release-team mailing list release-team@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team