| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Unfortunately, it looks like this proposal's one of those things that |
| 4 |
> some people will hate for ideological reasons no matter what. I just |
| 5 |
> hope there're enough people on the Council for whom QA and user systems |
| 6 |
> not breaking is sufficiently important that they'll vote in favour of |
| 7 |
> it. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
While I support enabling test by default I'm about to do a "foot in |
| 11 |
mouth" moment and suggest something that is far too over complicated |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
This is a compromise between those that want tests by default and those |
| 14 |
who don't and has these simple rules |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
1) Tests are enabled by default for ~arch ebuilds. |
| 17 |
2) Tests are _not_ enabled by default for stable ebuilds. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
~arch users will therefore have to explicitly disable tests and run the |
| 20 |
risks associated with that. My guess is that arch users are also the |
| 21 |
ones more likely to have CFLAGS or LDFLAGS that are significantly |
| 22 |
different from the defaults hopefully enabling tests will catch all the |
| 23 |
issues we know that are going to have. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
arch users will have to explicitly enable tests, but hopefully by the |
| 26 |
time a package has been marked stable it has had its unit tests ( oh im |
| 27 |
pointing that foot in mouth again ) run enough times to verify its |
| 28 |
correctness. |
Archives