Le 21/07/2011 01:54, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
> [...]
> So slightly more relaxed than Brett's view:
> - definitely apply bug fixes and their tests to affected maintenance branches
> - *optionally* apply coverage enhancements to maintenance branches,
> but don't feel obliged to do so
>
> I see it as
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 7/21/2011 2:58 AM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
>> I concur with Brett. Nothing good will come from backporting tests that
>> aren't aimed at a specific bugfix.
>
> They could catch reversions that otherwise would not be caught. This would
> m
On 7/21/2011 2:58 AM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
I concur with Brett. Nothing good will come from backporting tests that
aren't aimed at a specific bugfix.
They could catch reversions that otherwise would not be caught. This
would mainly apply to 2.7. It would not be an issue for 3.2 if all fix
On 21/07/2011 00:07, Vinay Sajip wrote:
Victor Stinner haypocalc.com> writes:
New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we may
also break some stable buildbots. I don't think that we need to add
these new tests to a stable version.
Just for my information, which loggin
On Jul 20, 2011, at 3:16 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:48, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 7/20/2011 12:25 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
> Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
> New logging tests failed
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> I say don't add new tests for the sake of coverage or adding new tests to
> stable branches. Tests for bugfixes are practically required.
I don't *object* to enhanced tests going into maintenance branches,
but the workflow of committing direc
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:48, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 7/20/2011 12:25 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
>> Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
>>
>>> Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
>>>
>> New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we m
Victor Stinner haypocalc.com> writes:
> New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we may
> also break some stable buildbots. I don't think that we need to add
> these new tests to a stable version.
Just for my information, which logging test failures are you referring to
On 7/20/2011 12:25 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we may
also break some stable buildbots. I don't think that we need to ad
Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we may
also break some stable buildbots. I don't think that we need to add
these new tests to a stable version.
Vict
Hello everyone,
I’ve seen recent commits in the default branch (3.3) that improve test
coverage (for example logging) or add new test files (cgitb, committed
by Brian). Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable
branches? For existing test files that get more tests, is the commit
11 matches
Mail list logo
