From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Hj26z-0003eE-Ag for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 01 May 2007 23:50:25 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l41NnONv022240; Tue, 1 May 2007 23:49:24 GMT Received: from nemesis.fprintf.net (nemesis.fprintf.net [66.134.112.218]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l41NkgoC018543 for ; Tue, 1 May 2007 23:46:42 GMT Received: (qmail 30782 invoked by uid 210); 1 May 2007 19:46:41 -0400 Received: from 192.168.0.8 by nemesis (envelope-from , uid 201) with qmail-scanner-1.25st (clamdscan: 0.90.2/3186. spamassassin: 3.1.8. perlscan: 1.25st. Clear:RC:0(192.168.0.8):SA:0(-4.4/5.0):. Processed in 0.217608 secs); 01 May 2007 23:46:41 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.4 required=5.0 Received: from athena.fprintf.net (HELO ?192.168.0.8?) (dang@fprintf.net@192.168.0.8) by nemesis.fprintf.net with SMTP; 1 May 2007 19:46:41 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] tests From: Daniel Gryniewicz To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20070502013220.7a3ae9a4@sheridan.genone.homeip.net> References: <200705011508.57220.peper@gentoo.org> <20070502013220.7a3ae9a4@sheridan.genone.homeip.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 19:46:56 -0400 Message-Id: <1178063216.1136.6.camel@athena.fprintf.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: affc8ddf-99d1-4125-b5e6-78f4a4041d2d X-Archives-Hash: 5b8936479d3a933109678bf64101fc52 On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 01:32 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: > > I'd approach it a bit different: Before creating fixed classification > groups I'd first identify the attributes of tests that should be used > for those classifications. > a) cost (in terms of runtime, resource usage, additional deps) > b) effectiveness (does a failing/working test mean the package is > broken/working?) > c) importance (is there a realistic chance for the test to be useful?) > d) correctness (does the test match the implementation? overlaps a bit > with effectiveness) > e) others? There is one serious problem with this: Who's going to do the work to figure all this out for the 11,000 odd packages in the tree? This seems like a *huge* amount of work, work that I have no plan on doing for the 100-odd packages I (help) maintain, let alone the 4-10 different versions of each package. I highly doubt other maintainers want to do this kind of work either. Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list