[ZODB-Dev] Repozo tests -- not
jim at zope.com
Wed Dec 2 06:22:57 EST 2009
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 8:44 PM, Martin Aspeli <optilude+lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jim Fulton wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Jim Fulton <jim at zope.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Tres Seaver <tseaver at palladion.com> wrote:
>> importantly, Chris' change touches non-trivial code that isn't
>> exercised by your test.
>> It *looks* OK (aside from the minor bug). We are doing users a
>> serious disservice
>> giving them such an important tool with minimal tests and no automated tests.
>> I'm going to back out these changes. If someone really cares about
>> repozo in the
>> slightest, they'll at least convert the existing manual test into an
>> automated test.
>> I'm pretty sure that this is a straightforward project. With an
>> automated version of the
>> manual test, I'd be comfortable reapplying Chris' change.
>> Is anyone willing to convert the manual test to an automated one?
> Can you clarify this? To me, it looks like:
> - there was a small/trivial bug
> - there were no tests for the existing code
> - Chris fixed it, and didn't add any tests
The fix was (apropriately) not trivial.
> - Noise ensued
> - Tres wrote a trivial test for the trivial fix
And the test was inadequate. It tested that the symptom addressed by
the fix went away. It didn't test that the fix didn't
break backups and restores.
> - You now found some different problem in the same code, and want to
> back out Chris' change because he didn't go and add a bunch of tests for
> the rest of the code, which he didn't change.
Read my message more carefiully. I'm backing out the change until
there are tests for the code that he did change.
> If I have this right, I am astonished. I'm going to give you a chance to
> tell me I have it all wrong before I pass judgement, though.
You have it wrong. Read my message carefully.
This whole discussion is rather dissappointing. Something
you really want to get right is a backup tool, yet while
people argue that there should be one, no one seems to be
very concerned about whether it works correctly.
No one seems to be willing to step up and take responsibility.
I guess everyone assumes I will.
More information about the ZODB-Dev