Am Sonntag, 1. November 2015 um 21:46:00, schrieb Georg Baum <georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de> > Kornel Benko wrote: > > > Optimist (I mean 'usable state'). > > I am strongly against such policy. First one has to check if the reason is > > really babel/polyglossia conflict. > > There are already too many tests inverted, no one cares anymore. > > We have a chicken and egg problem here. I started to work on the language > nesting stuff, and fixing this without introducing regressions is impossible > without creating specific test cases first. So, for this particular area of > the code, the tests are already unusable, and we cannot get it into a good > state again without usable tests...
It is not only you. If our tests were usable at that time, then it would have
been easy to
check and set the appropriate tests in reverted drawer.
> In principle I am with Kornel here, but in the current situation I think the
> only option we have is to set up more specific tests, fix the code one bug
> at a time, and then begin to look at the automatic export tests again. In
> the mean time, I don't care too much whether the failing tests are inverted
> or not.
Does it mean 'delay 2.2 alpha'?
> Georg
Kornel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
