On 2007 January 29 16:58, Colin Putney wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2007, at 9:23 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> > I actually side with Ralph on this one. It is very satisfying to
> > see the test runner turn green. With tests in the image that you
> > cannot fix, you will never get this satisfaction.
>
> True, the green bar is very satisfying. But Ralph's reasons go a bit
> deeper. The purpose of a test suite is to provide immediate feedback
> on during development. Running the suite is like asking "how am I
> doing?" A green bar means "fine," and a red bar means, "STOP! You
> just introduced a bug!" The value of a test suite is that it can let
> us know that we've introduced a bug at the moment it happens. 

Yes, also I think this is important when test are automated (e.g using a test 
server) - add a change to the image (install a new version of MCZ, load a 
changeset) and run tests: If all succeed, good, if something fails, a bug was 
introduced. Unless something in the system keeps track of bugs that 
are "expected to fail" and compares them to what just happened, it is 
important to have all tests succeed for auto-testing to work.

Milan

> That's 
> the best time to fix it, because the person who understands it best
> is right there and has all the information he needs.
>
> On the other hand, a test suite is *not* a bug database. That's what
> Mantis is for. "Visibility" of known bugs doesn't get them fixed, it
> just makes them overshadow the unknown bugs we'll introduce going
> forward.
>
> Colin