+1 to adding tests to all new features, but some guidance on what these tests should look like is necessary.
-walter On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Simon Schampijer <si...@schampijer.de> wrote: > How does the test coverage looks like? Human testing or automated tests? > > Thanks, > Simon > > > On 05/17/2013 03:13 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: >> >> Simon, Manuel, >> >> any feedback about this? I see a few possible levels >> >> 1 Everything, bugfixes included >> 2 Every feature patch >> 3 Every patch to the new html/javascript code >> 4 Nothing, leave it to the contributor willingness >> >> I'm opposed to 4 :) I tend to think we should do 2, because a lot of new >> code is landing and the more code without tests we need to maintain the >> worst the quality situation will get. I guess 3 would also be a >> possibility >> if we want to try it out and increase gradually. >> >> >> On 13 May 2013 00:28, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarv...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'd like to propose to make it a requirement, enforced by code reviews, >>> to >>> provide good test coverage when submitting new code. It will raise the >>> bar >>> for contributions but it's essential if we want to improve quality (and I >>> think we have to). I can add a paragraph about it to sugar-docs, if we >>> have >>> consensus. >>> >>> A few details: >>> >>> * What to do with patches which have been already submitted? I think it >>> really depends on the patch, so I'd leave it to the reviewer discretion. >>> * Should this apply to bug fixes? I tend to think it should, we are not >>> in >>> a particularly active bug fixing period now, so it's a good time to start >>> with those too. >>> * Cannot apply to javascript code yet, because the infra is not in place. >>> Though writing the infra is on the short time priorities, so this should >>> change soon. >>> * Cannot apply to activities because we are missing infra bits. It would >>> not be too hard to add them, but I think we should focus on html >>> activities >>> now. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel Narvaez >>> >>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel