Andreas Raab wrote:
> Ken Causey wrote:
>> On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 20:03 -0700, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>> * http://source.squeak.org/tests
>>>
>>> This is the main repository for unit tests. It will be
>>> world-readable AND world-writable. We encourage everyone to write
>>> more tests and commit them, improve the existing tests and bring in
>>> entirely new test suites.
>>>
>>> * http://source.squeak.org/inbox
>>>
>>> This repository is intended as dropbox. It’s usage will depend on
>>> what we make it out to be. The idea is to have it world-readable and
>>> world-writable, too.
>>>
>>
>> I've had a question about this.  If a developer writes a test, finds a
>> problem, and develops a fix is it the intention that she put the fix in
>> inbox but the test in tests?  Doesn't that just complaint things for
>> everyone in terms of linking the two?  What is the value of two separate
>> inboxes?
>
> To me, it's just a pre-filtering that says that anything in tests will
> require less work (if any) for review during integration. Effectively
> I would expect that if I merge tests this will work with no further
> effort, whereas with inbox I would assume that I at least need to look
> at what it does. If we find that this isn't a useful distinction we
> should get rid of it but I think it would be useful to explicitly
> encourage submitting tests.
>
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
>
>
Andreas Raab wrote:
> Ken Causey wrote:
>> On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 20:03 -0700, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>> * http://source.squeak.org/tests
>>>
>>> This is the main repository for unit tests. It will be
>>> world-readable AND world-writable. We encourage everyone to write
>>> more tests and commit them, improve the existing tests and bring in
>>> entirely new test suites.
>>>
>>> * http://source.squeak.org/inbox
>>>
>>> This repository is intended as dropbox. It’s usage will depend on
>>> what we make it out to be. The idea is to have it world-readable and
>>> world-writable, too.
>>>
>>
>> I've had a question about this.  If a developer writes a test, finds a
>> problem, and develops a fix is it the intention that she put the fix in
>> inbox but the test in tests?  Doesn't that just complaint things for
>> everyone in terms of linking the two?  What is the value of two separate
>> inboxes?
>
> To me, it's just a pre-filtering that says that anything in tests will
> require less work (if any) for review during integration. Effectively
> I would expect that if I merge tests this will work with no further
> effort, whereas with inbox I would assume that I at least need to look
> at what it does. If we find that this isn't a useful distinction we
> should get rid of it but I think it would be useful to explicitly
> encourage submitting tests.
>
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
Tests are useful for all users of squeak whatever fork they are using.

A new test should be submitted to Mantis and tested in as many images as
possible, either manually or automatically. The test can be marked using
the test tagging feature of SUNit-improved indvalidate if there are any
images that it is known not to work in for good reason.

Maintainers of other forks can be informed to let them know of the new
test, and they can install it using Installer mantis. Better still get
bob to build an image of their fork with your tests in it and show them
that it is good.

Keith