1 |
On Sun, 25 Dec 2016 22:55:27 +0300 |
2 |
Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> <testing> |
5 |
> Description how to test this package... |
6 |
> </testing> |
7 |
|
8 |
Alternatively, why not have a metatag that just |
9 |
permits a valid URL that points to testing instructions? |
10 |
|
11 |
Benefits: |
12 |
|
13 |
* Multiple packages can share instructions without redundancy |
14 |
* Edits to the testing instructions can be made without causing commit churn |
15 |
* Editorial powers for testing instructions can be centralised to a wiki page |
16 |
instead of requiring commit powers. |
17 |
* Can theoretically support URLs such as: |
18 |
filesdir://instructions.txt |
19 |
which resolve to ${FILESDIR} |
20 |
|
21 |
( And similar ) |
22 |
|
23 |
Potential Downsides: |
24 |
* Not integrated with portage, meaning you can't just set a feature |
25 |
like FEATURES="Show testing instructions" which unifies all <testing> section |
26 |
and prints them at the end of the emerge run for you to complete. |
27 |
( And this expands to future things that might be useful to do here, like checklists |
28 |
and having a tool that helps guide you through the test plan to make sure all steps are |
29 |
performed ) |