From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6481B1381FA for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 03:38:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 77621E094B; Sat, 31 May 2014 03:38:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65878E0908 for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 03:38:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A809633FE03 for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 03:38:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.446, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d42GDgJ5AhOA for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 03:38:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCC4133FDEE for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 03:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wqa7k-0006Vs-Sv for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 31 May 2014 05:38:24 +0200 Received: from 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca ([71.17.69.121]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 05:38:24 +0200 Received: from rhill by 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 05:38:24 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Ryan Hill Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: Removing src_test from www-client/chromium Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 21:38:12 -0600 Organization: Gentoo Message-ID: <20140530213812.02c622bc@caribou.gateway.pace.com> References: <5384388D.9080701@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_/iC1zGyCXxijVhT6iGvJ8bWn"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 71-17-69-121.yktn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Archives-Salt: 004dc64e-aeba-4ada-a7f9-00a14592d6b5 X-Archives-Hash: 9ddc268cf8d1a4b6ea88de590685a606 --Sig_/iC1zGyCXxijVhT6iGvJ8bWn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 27 May 2014 09:02:37 +0200 ""Pawe=C5=82 Hajdan, Jr."" wrote: > It's more of a project-internal decision IMHO, but just wanted to get > feedback from the larger community. >=20 > Currently 11 out of 27 bugs assigned to chromium.g.o are related to test > failures. >=20 > I don't remember a single case where a test failure would point to a > real bug in our package. >=20 > I'm seriously considering just removing src_test to make the package > more maintainable (less code, less bugs filed, can focus on things that > *do* impact our users). >=20 > If you decide to comment in favor of keeping src_test, please consider > volunteering to help us with the bugs. >=20 > Feel free to suggest solutions that fall somewhere in between - e.g. > having src_test but not excluding any tests there and using > RESTRICT=3Dtest, so that someone who really wants to run the tests FYI can > do so. I've said it before, but I think that by having packages in the tree that we know consistently fail their testsuites, we create a situation where we are worse off than if we simply disabled the tests for that package. Let's look at what enabling tests gets you right now: - additional dependencies - longer compile times - blockers - lots of scrolly output - devs ignore your bug reports - absolutely no peace of mind because every third package fails for no good reason If I wasn't a dev I would have turned it off long long ago (and I suspect m= any already have). Test coverage is a good thing, so it'd be nice to give people an actual incentive to do it. So +1. --=20 Ryan Hill psn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 --Sig_/iC1zGyCXxijVhT6iGvJ8bWn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTiU6kAAoJEO04vUmVeoRjaqUH/31d3xeJoLItIM0kiFZ+iJat FcqYpgnufzJybTwry1eURUNJeRTSgnl6g2vQ/Ulzf9I4p6Yo3hB4FDCz250klREs 6WTiYC2YJpRRccNmCd4tBSQxfR6ddisg8ADnB4GlHN/KDBCQZ9Oq4aEiG6Ojc0qC bb/XCzEiqT0hetKvn2J6h0H0SKDaSMyonpRDzfcujT7o8vNi1Uri5ObnVGsWWlQ6 5nipz/HxiCXcT/XPbC/E1paxRGublStIGo/qFjLbsCwm6dtJlDxl4auPkkjpLySh GrBW2ikFP7eGT7mlnrMl05W8leHuXwNP9P+UELziHU98sDn95kd2rgjdaMcdCrU= =eErl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/iC1zGyCXxijVhT6iGvJ8bWn--