From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add awesome.
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 17:09:39 +0200
Message-ID: <87a8ipceh8.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <1465776755-16444-1-git-send-email-carlo@zancanaro.id.au>
	<1465778333-19689-1-git-send-email-carlo@zancanaro.id.au>
	<20160613095331.76d99012@scratchpost.org>
	<CAFAGzb8MUAbVrH3bFUi_kMOa0dDmksHpgWKVUzvbGVUYxzkqUw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33938)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bCTUp-0001mA-6Z
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 11:09:48 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bCTUk-0007Qs-VF
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 11:09:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAFAGzb8MUAbVrH3bFUi_kMOa0dDmksHpgWKVUzvbGVUYxzkqUw@mail.gmail.com>
	(Carlo Zancanaro's message of "Mon, 13 Jun 2016 21:54:37 +1000")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Carlo Zancanaro <carlozancanaro@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Hello!

Carlo Zancanaro <carlozancanaro@gmail.com> skribis:

> On 13 June 2016 at 17:53, Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org>
> wrote:

[...]

>> What's up with the tests? Why disable them like this?
>>
>
> There actually aren't any tests, so if I leave the "check" phase to do the
> default "make test", it fails. This way it at least checks that the aweso=
me
> binary was compiled and can be run. I'll put a comment in explaining that.

Fair enough.  In that case, could you simply add a comment with this
explanation around the =E2=80=98check=E2=80=99 phase?  That way, future con=
tributors
will immediately see why we=E2=80=99re doing this.

Thank you!

Ludo=E2=80=99.