From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Pirotte Subject: Re: Treating tests as special case Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 15:36:56 -0300 Message-ID: <20180406153656.7f3d55f0@capac> References: <20180405052439.GA30291@thebird.nl> <20180405082115.60e604a6@alma-ubu> <20180405084300.GB31585@thebird.nl> <87lge0aeys.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_/uflwCx9cU+x1v=g_tTbsE3k"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58119) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f4WEe-0002iY-SY for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 14:37:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f4WEa-00025b-UQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 14:37:16 -0400 Received: from maximusconfessor.all2all.org ([79.99.200.102]:46681) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f4WEa-00024s-NA for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2018 14:37:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87lge0aeys.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Chris Marusich Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --Sig_/uflwCx9cU+x1v=g_tTbsE3k Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, > > An idea that came up on #guix several months ago was to separate the > > building of packages from testing. Testing would be a continuation of > > the build, like grafts could be envisioned as a continuation of the > > build. =20 > What problems would that solve? If one can run tests suites locally upon built packages, that would already= save quite a great deal of planet heat I guess, not building from the source in = the first place, but only if they find a bug, fix it ... - and iiuc, Mark would have = found the bug he mentioned ...=20 > Even if those components worked for the maintainers who ran the tests on > their own machines and made a release, they might not work correctly in > your own situation. Mark's story is a great example of this! For this > reason, some people will still choose to build things from source > themselves, even if substitutes are available from some other place. But they would rebuild from the source just to run the tests? Sounds to me = that, if possible, separate test suites from the building process is an added value = to the current situation Cheers, David --Sig_/uflwCx9cU+x1v=g_tTbsE3k Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEhCJlRZtBM3furJHe83T9k6MFetcFAlrHvkgACgkQ83T9k6MF etdCzQgAtHnbndMp97sR6lVVms6Z3nrdsnKJT3dfjqlIqBVkoWZOYouwPwA0KXe7 Wol5W9vPUhLVO5SHox5jfQuR0CArrRNz/hjSTst4ji162lekpFyxEXI1yaKfxZaM GspFUihQxa9ZhD1KhWCuRYpcYJ5U9OvDQoDYp6peLyIGrHCVMIlJj46yP/CHKh+9 kwOy76lZGV12IPexQ9SQmQMWsQTVw3K1h9xiSIfm+A8rXeY4KVzEpPiNEvCcdXMH KrE4WzyoDpJjVNvhyZ+TTYFtrDhzpSgv98UKt6JlUZ9ZRPBz9z+hlqggDAa9ufzI w2clsIxHvXZy9hN4cK5dNADUVsNyHw== =+lRs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/uflwCx9cU+x1v=g_tTbsE3k--