Sure, and I mentioned that initially. But we at least need to look at each failing test and make a determination before blindly pushing out a beta. I have fixed a couple of easily fixable tests in the past couple of days that anybody who looked at them could have fixed.
-Rasmus On 08/29/2011 12:42 AM, Nathaniel Catchpole wrote: > Unless test failures are critical, it seems worth either commenting out > or converting to xfail ones that can't be immediately fixed. > > That gives a 0 fail baseline to work from for detecting regressions, and > test failures should be associated with bug reports anyway so it's not > like they'd get lost forever. > > Nat > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <ras...@lerdorf.com > <mailto:ras...@lerdorf.com>> wrote: > > On 08/29/2011 12:23 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > > Hi! > > > > On 8/28/11 11:06 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > >> I would really like to see the number of failed tests hit 0 before we > >> even consider a 5.4 beta release. It shouldn't take that long to > fix the > >> remaining tests. I'm down to 48 with just about everything > enabled on my > >> Ubuntu laptop here. They are listed here if you are curious: > >> http://codepad.org/jtVeWgao > > > > It'd be a great idea to get 0 fails. Could we do it by Wed? ;) > > I don't know, but the release schedule relies on us fixing outstanding > issues. Given our recent history, failing bugs are, and should be, > outstanding issues. > > -Rasmus > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
