[Distutils] Distribute 0.6.7 this week
ssteinerx at gmail.com
Tue Oct 27 15:26:05 CET 2009
On Oct 27, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> Maybe something like a TEST_README documenting the tests that prove
>> the that
>> the closed ticket's bugs have a test that proves that the former bad
>> behaviour was fixed.
> Maybe a simpler way would be to use Bitbucket issue tracker features ?
Are you suggesting maybe getting at that through the (undocumented)
API, or something else?
> For the last two bugs I've fixed, they have a corresponding test in
> the commit.
> And if you go to the issue, you have a link to the commit with a diff,
> so you can see it.
> That's done with the special "fixes #N" bit in the commit messages,
> where N is the issue number. Bitbuckets links the tyicket with the
> commits when its pushed there. So we could maybe add the link to
> the issue in CHANGES ?
I'm not sure what mechanisms we have for this, do you know?
> Although some parts are cleary undertested yet, so even if it's
> unpleasant to add tests in an undertested code base, I am +1 in
> making the tests mandatory when the code is not yet covered for now on
That was what we discussed at the sprint and I'm doing what I feel is
my job as QA PITA (pain in the ass) by insisting that A> we have tests
for anything fixed and especially not covered and B> that we document
the test related to the fix so that whomever reported the bug can
verify that the test does indeed cover the use-case they reported.
What is the next step?
More information about the Distutils-SIG