Adding tests package to the image [GO VOTE!]
Doug Way
dway at mailcan.com
Wed Feb 11 04:35:45 UTC 2004
Okay, the voting has ended, and people seem to be pretty evenly divided
on the issue.
http://people.squeakfoundation.org/article/25.html
Given that, I'm going to proceed with adding the tests back into the
update stream. Actually, I think it's about a 240K update, not 300K.
(we've had other updates that big, anyway)
The vote wasn't binding, but had there been overwhelming opposition, I
would've reconsidered not adding the tests. The vote was a useful
experiment. Julian & I detailed the advantages/disadvantages on the
issue, which may have added more clarity... or perhaps further
confusion. :) I definitely see both sides, but I think adding them is
the right thing to do for now. (And Lex makes a good point below which
I missed.)
Also, upon further thought, it would be more consistent to leave the
tests in the Basic-final image. That way, the alpha image always
follows the basic image... there's no special case goofiness. And then
we won't be removing and re-adding the tests into the update stream for
every release.
- Doug
On Saturday, February 7, 2004, at 09:42 AM, Lex Spoon wrote:
> FWIW, putting tests in the image sounds fine to me, but I also don't
> care much. The 300k update is a one-shot deal, and anyway, people who
> use beta images just have to be ready to deal with this kind of thing.
> They can download an updated image if they prefer, or wait for the next
> stable release.
>
> On the flip side, it makes perfect sense to distribute tests for a blop
> of code in whatever fashion the blop of code is already distributed.
> For packages on SM, put the tests on SM. For non-packages maintained
> via the update stream, maintain the tests in the update stream, too.
>
> And Doug said it too lightly. Putting the tests in the image makes it
> *easier* to split out new packages. Right now, you have to get Marcus
> to weed out part of the mega test package and make it part of the test
> package for your newly created package, but if tests are in the image
> you can split them the same way you split everything else.
>
> So in short, treat tests just like the code they apply to, and we will
> seem to do very well on any line of argument you name.
>
> But I don't care strongly. It's just a quick thought.
>
>
> -Lex
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|