On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 08:09:03PM -0400, Doug Way wrote:
> 
> I just wanted to add that this scheme of having a test package for each
> removed "Squeak official" package sounds like an excellent idea.  Probably
> eventually (in a future version of SqueakMap) there would be a special link
> from a package to its test package, or the test package would be a dependent,
> or something similar.  But for now, a regular extra package sounds great.
> 
> Mmm, would we want to make the original package maintainer also be the
> maintainer of the test package?  If possible, that might be best, even if you
> end up writing some of the initial test packages.
> 

I'd actually prefer if the package maintainers would come up with tests
themselves: 
1) it's really very helpfull for doing the "maintainer" work: a maintainer
   has to do some kind of testrun by hand anyway, why not automate it?
2) It's simple. But it's work (and pretty boring, too). So I can do the
   simple first packages even for the removals I don't maintain,
   but I won't maintain those in the future. Maintaining a test-packge is
   really not much work for the maintainer of the package, but it would
   be a lot of work for a third person (esp. if this person doesn't normally
   use the package)
3) Real test need *real* refactorings. Only the maintainer might have enough
   energy to do this... 

  Marcus 

-- 
Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de  -- Squeak! http://squeak.de