-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/21/2014 09:22 AM, Alexander Todorov wrote:
Hi guys, (note: devel, packaging and test lists) previously I've
done a little experiment and counted how many packages are likely
to have upstream test suites and how many don't:
http://atodorov.org/blog/2013/12/24/upstream-test-suite-status-of-fedora-20/
In general around 35% do have test suites, the rest don't.
My goal is to bring down the number of packages which ship without
any sort of test suite inside their code base.
The first step is to identify them and track them in Bugzilla.
My question is: **Is everyone, especially package maintainers OK
with me filing 1000+ bugs ?**
Last time I did so (around 100 bugs) it got a few people unhappy
so better ask this time!
If you are unhappy seeing such many bugs and having your mailbox
full with notifications from Bugzilla please reply with a better
proposal and why do you consider it better.
Thanks, Alex
Please make sure to follow
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mass_bug_filing to the letter. If you
do not, it will make life very difficult.
That being said, a lot of packages in Fedora are simply that: packaged
upstreams. Many (most?) package maintainers are not developers of that
package and as such are probably not equipped to add tests to their
systems.
A better case here would be to find a way to identify those packages
whose upstreams have tests that are not being run in %check. That
probably *would* be considered a bug.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlMHYwYACgkQeiVVYja6o6O24ACdG3hrZ4m7AMlwP18IfUtjOnNS
k1oAn2x3cSRhzgEKOp6HqVygDChryw5w
=EAc9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----