Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-avalon-dev-archive@avalon.apache.org Received: (qmail 41585 invoked by uid 500); 12 Mar 2003 09:30:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@avalon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@avalon.apache.org Received: (qmail 41573 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2003 09:30:58 -0000 Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (210.49.20.136) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Mar 2003 09:30:58 -0000 Received: from brainstem.dyndns.org (c17243.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au [210.49.246.103]) by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2C9V9u00510 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:31:09 +1100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Peter Donald To: "Avalon Developers List" Subject: Re: cvs commit: avalon-excalibur/io/src/xdocs index.xml menu.xml Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:44:06 +1100 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.2 References: <200303120815.16532.peter@realityforge.org> <3E6E65CF.9030600@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <3E6E65CF.9030600@apache.org> X-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of the author. X-Copyright: (C) 2002 Peter Donald. X-Wisdom: A right is not what someone gives you; it's what no one can take from you. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200303122044.06418.peter@realityforge.org> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:40, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > Peter Donald wrote, On 11/03/2003 22.15: > ... > > > ...backward incompatible > > changes are all the rage in AValon these days. Supporting users is so= oo > > yesterday. > > It's not. > > We will support users as much as we can. We've said it before, we say i= t > again. Any incompatible change made was completely unintentional. "saying" !=3D "doing" > To catch these early (yes, Gump should be our *last* resort), we should > have unit tests running regularly on the classes; they would have > probably caught these signature changes. doubtful their signatures would have just been updated at the same time.=20 Besides how many people actually run the unit tests - given the number of= =20 "stable" packages that have/had unit tests that fail I don't think there = is a=20 lot.=20 > What do you all think should be our unit test policy? 100% coverage and 100% passing for toolkits or as close to as possible. i= e an=20 example of good quality would be =20 http://spice.sourceforge.net/configkit/clover/index.html=20 For integration components and containers we probably can't reasonably as= =20 stringent but should aim for high quality rather than this lets just chan= ge=20 something and hope it compiles ... let alone works policy that is now in=20 place.=20 --=20 Cheers, Peter Donald --------------------------------------------------- "It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we=20 cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our=20 responsibilities." -Josiah Stamp=20 ---------------------------------------------------=20 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org