lucy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nathan Kurz <>
Subject Re: [lucy-dev] C TAP test harnesses
Date Mon, 16 May 2011 05:47:24 GMT
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Marvin Humphrey <> wrote:
> The apreq harness isn't a good replacement candidate in its present
> form, though, because it requires APR.

I tend to like the approach of having everything self-contained, but
if there were candidates I would think the the APR would be high on
the list.  Also, I would guess that a developer only test-suite
wouldn't be much of a hindrance to adoption.

Is there a formal policy on avoiding outside dependencies, or is this
just a general preference?   Are you planning to stay the course of
independence, or is there a point you'd consider utilizing outside


View raw message