[Suggestion] GNUstep-test for quality control (WAS: Re: deferred deallocation)

[Yen-Ju Chen]

> From: "Alex Perez" <aperez@student.santarosadu>
> To: <discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>
> Subject: [Fwd: Re: deferred deallocation of local objects]
> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:52:08 -0700 (PDT)
 [snip]
> >
> > Checking that code works BEFORE actually commiting it to CVS is the
> > issue here.
> Exactly. It's about quality control, or the lack thereof, and nothing
> more.

 Since it is difficult for anyone to test GNUstep on multiple platforms,
 I would like to suggest a GNUstep-test for testing.
 I know there are some testing code in GNUstep,
 and some of them use guile which I will never try to use.
 Something like "gmake test" would be more easy for normal user.
 "gmake test" is used in some of the library.

 By doing that, everyone can more easily test the GNUstep pre-release or 
CVS.
 After downloading and compiling GNUstep,
 use "gmake test" will report the bug if any.
 Because it is so easy, everyone can do it,
 and report his result and information of platform and libraries such as 
XML, ffi or ffcall.

 GNUstep-base is quite good for this test because the interface is pretty 
much stable.
 I think it would be a good way for quality control.

 Yen-Ju

_________________________________________________________________
Never get a busy signal because you are always connected  with high-speed 
Internet access. Click here to comparison-shop providers.  
https://broadband.msn.com