Re: svn commit: r19317 - trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest

Michael Haggerty wrote:
> But if a test causes itself to be skipped (by raising an svntest.Skip
> exception) then there wouldn't be much call for running it again, would
> there? The sandboxes of tests that fail are *not* cleaned up, even
> after this commit. (My guess was that the old behavior was an oversight
> in the implementation of the skip behavior.)

Agreed.

> But I would certainly be happy to restore the old behavior if that is
> what people want.

No.

> On a related point, if a test is explicitly marked Skip (by being listed
> as Skip(test_name, 1)) then it seems superfluous to generate a sandbox
> in the first place. (For tests that are skipped by throwing a Skip
> exception, on the other hand, it is not so easy to avoid creating a
> Sandbox.) So I was thinking of skipping sandbox creation for explicitly
> Skipped tests. What do people think of that?

+0: not a significant time saving, as all "Sandbox::__init__" does is set a few
variables. The significant time taken to build a sandbox is in the
"sandbox.build()" call within a test.

- Julian

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Apr 12 13:38:07 2006