Hi Josh
On 15/08/2023 23:55, Josh Steadmon wrote:
On 2023.08.14 14:29, Phillip Wood wrote:
[...]
I don't have a strong preference for which harness we use so long as it
provides a way to (a) run tests that previously failed tests first and (b)
run slow tests first. I do have a strong preference for using the same
harness for both the unit tests and the integration tests so developers
don't have to learn two different tools. Unless there is a problem with
prove it would probably make sense just to keep using that as the project
test harness.
To be clear, it sounds like both of these can be done with `prove`
(using the various --state settings) without any further support from
our unit tests, right?
Yes
I see that we do have a "failed" target for
re-running integration tests, but that relies on some test-lib.sh
features that currently have no equivalent in the unit test framework.
Ooh, I didn't know about that, I think we could add something similar to
the framework if we wanted.
[...]
It sounds like we're getting to the point where we have pinned down our
requirements and the available alternatives well enough to make a decision.
Yes, v6 will include your TAP implementation (I assume you are still OK
if I include your patch in this series?).
Yes that's fine. I'm about to go off the list for a couple of weeks,
I'll take a proper look at v6 once I'm back.
Best Wishes
Phillip
