-----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----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
