[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Mauve test question

From: Archie Cobbs
Subject: Re: Mauve test question
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:40:05 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041129

Jeroen Frijters wrote:
>>The problem with that approach is that if someone adds a new test
>>to Mauve, it doesn't automatically get added to our "white list".
> That's a feature, not a bug! In practice new tests often get added that
> don't yet run without failures (and this is the right thing to do). So I
> strongly believe we should work with a white list.

Huh? Why is adding broken tests the right thing to do? And besides,
if a broken test is added, this way there will be motivation to resolve
the discrepancy. With a whitelist, a broken test can get added but
no one will notice and then it just sits there getting stale.


Archie Cobbs      *        CTO, Awarix        *

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for 
the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and 
privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of 
the original message.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]