>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Robert via Squeak-dev <
> squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> I see, alright, that's fair dinkum. I also feel strongly that a minimum
>> of tests be carried within the primary package for some code. If you
>> look at the Crypto packages, you'll see Hashing tests in hashing, Random
>> tests in Random, Cipher tests in Cipher. This way it is easy to run
>> them, off a CI server or what have you. The tests come with the code, is
>> a principle I try to follow.
>>
>
> Just my .02: I don't like the approach of putting tests with the code.
> I'm absolutely in favor of having as many tests as make sense, just please
> put them in a separate package.  While your approach seems reasonable for
> people who are working interactively on code and want to make sure things
> stay working as they are making changes, it doesn't make sense when what
> you are going for is a minimal or server image where the existing code is
> just being used, not actively developed.
>

+1   Everyone has different configuration needs.  As you know from your
recent investigations on dependencies, it doesn't mean the ability to load
(Core+Tests) has to require two clicks, it can still be just one.
Including tests is not useful for the use-case of "verifying you're running
the correct software" either, only an externally applied signature scheme
can do that, since you have to verify the tests packages, too.

 - Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200309/717385a4/attachment.html>