From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: call for more ert tests Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 22:16:08 +0300 Message-ID: <8338s7jp53.fsf@gnu.org> References: <838v1zjrnl.fsf@gnu.org> <8361x3jqsy.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1372101393 11893 80.91.229.3 (24 Jun 2013 19:16:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:16:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Sebastian Wiesner Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 24 21:16:31 2013 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 1UrCFX-0000nA-6o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 21:16:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38022 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UrCFW-00081c-Ph for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:16:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34964) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UrCFR-0007vX-T0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:16:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UrCFQ-0006Ca-RI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:16:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:51130) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UrCFQ-00069E-BR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:16:20 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MOW00600W5MKW00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 22:16:19 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MOW006PVW76EC40@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 22:16:19 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:160975 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 20:55:28 +0200 > From: Sebastian Wiesner > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > 2013/6/24 Eli Zaretskii : > >> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 20:33:41 +0200 > >> From: Sebastian Wiesner > >> Cc: Glenn Morris , emacs-devel@gnu.org > >> > >> > IMO, unless we require every new feature to come with a test and a > >> > report that no regressions were found by running the existing tests, > >> > we will never get any better testability than what we have now. > >> > >> Then this is probably a good policy, isn't it? > > > > Which policy? > > Well, requiring tests for new features or fixed bugs, and confirmation > that there are no regressions from the existing tests. I believe it's good, obviously. The problem is with introducing it without losing too many contributors.