RE: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution

["Gary R. Van Sickle" <g dot r dot vansickle at worldnet dot att dot net>]

> Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> > No, test development should be done by people not involved with the 
> > development of the software under test, or you have a 
> conflict of interest.
> 
> Not entirely true.  There's "whitebox" testing -- where 
> knowledge of internals is used to craft the test; this is 
> often done by the developer(s).  Then there's "blackbox" 
> testing -- where only the External Interface documentation is 
> used to design the test; this is where the developer(s) 
> should not be involved.
> 

I know, but if the developers are also developing the testing (be it white
or black-box), you still have a conflict of interest.  Better than nothing?
Sure.  But not as good as they have it in that Ideal World in which none of
us live.

> Both are useful.
> 
> But that's a side issue.  On the main topic of this thread, 
> I'm agnostic.  If somebody wants to do it, all well and good. 
>  If their tests reveal bugs in my packages, I will apply any 
> patches they generate.  But I don't have the time or desire 
> to spearhead -- or even participate -- in this effort; my 
> hands are full right now with enough cygwin tasks...

I think you echo the position of all except perhaps the OP there.

-- 
Gary R. Van Sickle


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/