Re: Merging Org tests

[Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de>]

phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) writes:

>> Also, how strictly must the suggested file organization be followed?
>> Skimming "make-test-deps.emacs-lisp" it seems it might have to be followed
>> rather strictly.
>
> It depends what you want. make-test-deps.emacs-lisp is there so that
> "make check-maybe" can work sanely to run (some approximation of) just
> those tests that need running. I thought this was a good thing to have,
> because "make check" takes too long to run in a commit hook.

In general it is a good thing (tm). But there shall be
improvements. Currently, if you want to run foo-tests.el, it depends on
foo.el. Often, this is sufficient. But for larger packages, like Org or
Tramp, this is not sufficient. So it might be good to maintain a list of
foo*.el files, a test file foo-tests.el shall depend on.

>> What would be the best strategy for including the Org tests in the Emacs
>> repo?
>>
>> 1. Include Org tests in the "manual" folder and keep the current structure.
>> 2. Start to reorganize the tests in the Org repo to follow the Emacs
>>    scheme.
>> 3. Keep tests in the Org repo.
>
> Really be good to get tests in into main, so not 3. That's the main
> thing.

Like Eli, I'm in favor of 2.

And pls mark expensive tests with the tag `expensive'. We should teach
elpa's "make check" to skip expensive tests, as we do in emacs' "make
check".

> Phil

Best regards, Michael.