On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:21:49AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote: > Chip, > > I support what you're saying here but want to offer up a compromise in the > process to lessen the work. I'm sure Anthony will want to add unit tests. > How about > > - We file a bug for unit tests for 4.2. > - Add the commits you said here to the bug. > - Give Anthony a week to two weeks to add the unit tests. > - If Anthony decides he doesn't have the bandwidth to add the unit tests in > that time, then he has to revert and then he can use that bug to track adding > back his changes along with unit tests. > > It saves some time on testing the revert and he can use the time instead to > add unit tests. Will be happy to add the bug if that's okay with you and > others on the list. > > --Alex
As I just said to Anthony in my previous email, I'm not trying to be an ass, but I am passionate about this topic. I just don't see why this would be a double standard for committers vs contributors. The code-base has a serious lack of tests in it, and that makes it hard to have faith in any merge. We need to start improving that situation. I'm also not sure that there is a rush to get this merged into master. The next feature release (4.2.0?) won't hit feature freeze for another 3 1/2 months. I'm also a little confused about why there is an issue with testing the revert. It seems to me that we should be able to revert commits when there are concerns like this, and that we have to accept the cost of it. Let's start improving the state if things *right now*, and not defer tests as an after thought. -chip
