From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBSw7ZobGVy?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: burden of maintainance Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:18:16 +0200 Message-ID: <560D9508.2060209@online.de> References: <560CEA6A.9000907@online.de> <834miaa847.fsf@gnu.org> <560D7F77.8060507@online.de> <83lhbm8kye.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443730729 6660 80.91.229.3 (1 Oct 2015 20:18:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 20:18:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 01 22:18:39 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhkJI-0001bz-3d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:18:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56097 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhkJH-0008H1-78 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:18:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39989) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhkJ4-0008Ga-PA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:18:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhkJ3-0005JL-OP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:18:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.131]:58480) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhkIz-0005FU-MO; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:18:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.178.31] ([77.12.88.20]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue005) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MBo1b-1ZpkfH2rxP-00ArLy; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:18:16 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 In-Reply-To: <83lhbm8kye.fsf@gnu.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:SdiV3VedXJrHfy+ZkXlEqf3if1w09I2RAYJB/8zChD9KjNfbp86 oyde+lkE5Pq1D8qvsvZAyVfPDkXVCAZh/aGoVb69zlBI9i/obkOMrP9qmGCrCvQlNjvgjmo D2TrLsisrqkel1lKVa+IzoE6SinOvF2P6kuTuxlB9+nYT5xiBnfsyQOZ0iUYl6MtQAivN9D t4mvpFEiFDsW3L128gahg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:TK7ZYs9Rxfs=:PnImzMo3nswVFUEv93EZTo zSzLLk6bfpnkFggcub4V/MLW01ODrDSWUTiA/aOdEVVMxFGiXtRZEbDrbZ1CSmalQJM9Sb4Lx IZW0H+M+Bl7WXQHqH9Rean/ueURIvvpXj7zf5C8lF5ZV3/lbOY/WvEme7g9OXs14Paprt8CIz Hlp3mYp29/FczF6BaTNoNP74WA4b1ZQjPHnpPNGsw5p2kvIV8w7B5CxeYJrmdjucHMXUfWRrS R4+688kT7iHn5Ov1+H68PXK1R3FUK3n8UiE/naXKYtREuZj2LwVXuG7STfv9J2Abo1mQFNNe2 1TeMc6dGPOHsCjOGMsNGGkuQskPc3jbzRQWVECCPJETzwDpIl/lcsvejJblT9nqtDp6g8X5FJ 2rGG/G3OSBgiEuTgH5DDn6HICO/wCiDw6U0U7hZ42nS0VvaGyCGhXcNSFnLoNhCy9YQr5kj2d cDOdrKMv1RWNLM+cuscsajdS4tm+P0vVADbrrkeI70yYnHFWCwEAiN340Er5rFksKj+m9eIWl SDW0WnqjTzY1DozZUa5JH1Jrz5n3GUN0rtCyaZsGMvfPFd05H9PRL88cOpe9vXxPkcq7zWvsi lZNeZ3hrfbrLTFNbdXxea4n7NWEQE1zLcOx9GW3OTl5Y23TdVf9iAi1l5XFFdBh3WTZ+dguPl iISQ3PtW8mBGsonvwej9dhBpnubxQqt39C+29HwxXFDTHEHe6ON1L4O0wtGDUA17/5mZfrITe 97Bkgmfvp2us/DPH X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.126.131 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:190593 Archived-At: Am 01.10.2015 um 21:09 schrieb Eli Zaretskii: >> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 20:46:15 +0200 >> From: Andreas Röhler >> CC: Eli Zaretskii >> >>> Suggestions for how to improve our test suite without alienating >>> potential contributors are welcome. >> What about saying: no checkin before the tests passed? > That is OK, but what to do if some tests fail for many moons before > they are fixed? We cannot stop development because of that. Let's understand tests as valid ones and checkins as non-trivial. It would suffice to put intelligent test-writing into the focus - where it's not yet or not yet to extend it deserves. > >> Coverage and quality of tests should be an integral part of developing. > That's the hard part. Our current coverage is quite low (my > impression; it would be good to have some tool that can measure > that). Worse, for interactive features (and there are a lot of them), > we lack the infrastructure for writing automated tests. Let's note that. > Also, I don't > quite see who will write tests for large portions of the C code, given > how few people are even prepared to work on that. Estimating one hour invested in writing the right tests might save ten-fold or more of development time afterwards. > The result is that > getting closer to good coverage is a huge job. > >> WRT to maintainance there are also redundancy, complexity which might be >> worked on. > Alas, there are wildly different views on what is and isn't complex. > >> Keeping an eye at the number of symbols - too many blow up the language, >> make in harder for beginners than needed. > Which symbols did you have in mind? > > > Not a special one at the moment. Just got the feeling the collection of used symbols were growing and growing last years.