[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r17032 - trunk/subversion/tests/clients/cmdline

From: Erik Huelsmann <ehuels_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2005-10-26 15:24:50 CEST

On 10/26/05, Peter N. Lundblad <peter@famlundblad.se> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> >> On 10/26/05, lundblad@tigris.org <lundblad@tigris.org> wrote:
> >> Log:
> >> * subversion/tests/client/cmdline/revert_tests.py
> >> (test_list): Make revert_from_wc_root XFail.
> > Actually, no, that's not the purpose of XFail, as far as I conceive it:
> > Tests should be marked XFail if a feature currently isn't implemented
> > or behaving as it should, but that fact is recognised and agreed upon
> > [ie postponing a fix is acceptable].
> This has come up before. Yes, it is a regression that needs to be fixed.
> But what's the point in making all nightly builds fail and all others
> tests fail? Either you just fix it, or add an issue as a 1.4.0 blocker.

Well, the point being that if there's a regression, normally, failing
tests indicate it. In this case, there hasn't been the same
indication. Other devs would have missed it if they weren't on irc
yesterday. Also, I think there's a difference between a once correctly
implemented behaviour not working anymore and a newly implemented
feature not working entirely as expected.

> Maybe others disagree with this opinion, and then I'll have to regret, I
> guess:-)

No need to regret. It's good to discuss these things every now and
then. Hopefully we reach concensus and document in hacking.html?

Anyway: I'll make sure it's unmarked XFail tonight (because it'll be
fixed by then).


Received on Wed Oct 26 15:26:06 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.