This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [maint] [maint] Michael Chastain for testsuite
- From: mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
- To: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com, me at cgf dot cx
- Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 22:10:32 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: [maint] [maint] Michael Chastain for testsuite
cgf> Does that translate into every bug reported eventually gets a test?
Hmmm, to put that in process terms: it means that a bug can't be closed
until there is a test for that bug in the test suite.
That would be good, but I'm not ready to go as far as to make it
a requirement for closing a PR. We've already got several problems
with PR's: the number of open PR's increases with time; and most PR's
go for a long time before getting any attention. I like to be a little
conservative about closing PR's but I'm not willing to add a requirement
that a PR has a test.
cgf> Would it make sense to add the test for a reported bug before a patch to
cgf> fix it is submitted?
I don't think so. It might be sensible to have these requirements
in parallel:
test must be committed before closing PR
code fix must be committed before closing PR
But I don't think it helps to require "test must be committed before
code fix is committed".
Michael C