How about that then:
- mark lengthy test with pragmas
- add a checkbox in test runner or run all but lengthy by default, and
then put lengthy tests in separate list, where user could run all of
them or select which one to run?

Or, by foreseeing more generic use cases, we could scan all test
methods for pragmas like:
<testCategory: #foo>

and then give user a selection where he could pick which ones to run or not.


2009/12/4 Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com>:
> On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 15:54 -0800, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> Ken Causey wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 13:36 -0800, Ronald Spengler wrote:
>> >> Would the people of the community be receptive to moving long running
>> >> tests out to a separately loadable package?
>> >
>> > I fear that separating a subset of tests from the rest will result in
>> > them being largely forgotten and unused.
>>
>> True, but which choice is preferable: Having a few tests never run, or
>> having no tests ever run? (hey, that rhymes! ;-)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>    - Andreas
>
> I think 'never' is the wrong word.  What I'm thinking of is an option to
> not run the long running tests that defaults to running all tests and
> actually requires some small effort from the user with hopefully at
> least a little thought and recognition that the other tests do exist.
> Separating out the long running tests into a separate package likely
> means newcomers are never aware of them and the rest of us forget about
> them, they are no longer maintained, and that's the end of them.  If a
> test is truly not useful, or at least never worth the running time
> required, fine just delete it;  but I have to assume that is not
> generally the case otherwise it would have already happened.
>
> I agree that currently running all the tests is not something you do
> without thought, but it's not that bad.  I'm using a 7 or 8 year old
> system and continuing to do other work while the tests run and they
> finish in 30-45 minutes for me.
>
> Ken
>
>
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.