commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Subject Re: Need for an alternatives to the main line of code.
Date Wed, 21 Aug 2013 01:23:37 GMT
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:55:51 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
> I agree that in general test are necessary to ensure that something 
> useful
> is being accomplished by the submitted code as I'd mentioned in my 
> mail.
>
> I admire the rigour of tests in CM. There was one case where I didn't 
> know
> what needs be tested and I didn't see the point in taking it further 
> since
> I'd copied the code over to a personal package and patched it as I 
> saw fit.

Good for you...

> All I'm saying is that sometimes commiters are in a better position 
> to
> judge what needs to be tested

A: Everything (ideally).
Q: What should be covered by unit tests?

> and either suggest tests or even add it if it
> is simple enough.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-999

CM is a collaborative work. Please refer to the archive for 
(re-)reading
what this means (ideally).

On the subject of this thread: I did not imply that an "experimental"
package would allow sloppy or undocumented code or bypass unit testing.
All (the above) things being equal, the purpose would be to compare
alternative designs.


Gilles

>
> Cheers,
> -Ajo
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Gary Gregory 
> <garydgregory@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On the point of tests: Considering tests a hurdle is the wrong way 
>> to look
>> at it. Tests are the foundation I can confidently build on and 
>> change code.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Ajo Fod <ajo.fod@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > My 2c worth. It seems like there is a general bottleneck. A lot of 
>> ideas
>> > don't get used because there is a hurdle that people have to make 
>> change
>> > that satisfy all code requirements like tests/reuse of blocks etc. 
>> This
>> > makes for a larger than necessary hurdle for people to contribute.
>> >
>> > Looks like Gilles tried to solve this problem. One alternative is 
>> to
>> place
>> > alternative/new code in a nursery/experimental package parallel to 
>> the
>> main
>> > line of code. This nursery code wouldn't be subject to the 
>> deprecation
>> step
>> > or stability guarantees. The nursery packages should be better 
>> than the
>> > main line of code or solve an unsolved problem demonstrated with
>> > appropriate tests.
>> >
>> > That way, users will be aware of and can benefit from the ability 
>> to
>> solve
>> > a problem in CM. This will also be "advertisement" for the needed 
>> work to
>> > include the work in the main line of code.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > -Ajo
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<
>> http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message