Am Samstag, 10. September 2016 um 08:03:37, schrieb Guenter Milde <mi...@users.sf.net> > On 2016-09-09, Kornel Benko wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2016 um 16:35:10, schrieb Guenter Milde > > <mi...@users.sf.net> > > Dear Kornel, > > > >> ... actually the labeling mechanism is constructed so that inversion > >> takes precedence and prevents tagging with "unreliable". > > >> Maybe this can be changed in an overhoul of the test setup... > > > Yes, there is some discussion needed. > > Maybe we can start with some simplification... > > * Can we rename "suspiciousTests" to "invertedTests", please?
Sure. Almost alike the original name has been (revertedTests)
> The "docstring" at the top of the file says:
>
> # Regular expressions for tests that are known to fail
> #
> # Patterns will be automatically enclosed with '^' and '$'.
> # Matching tests get the label "inverted"
> # or (if also matching a pattern in "suspendedTests") "suspended".
> # They get also the test-feature 'inverted', i.e.
> # they are reported as failing if the export works without error.
>
>
> * Do you still need the "suspendeTests"? What for?
Yes, we need them. This tests will not be executed with the call 'ctest -L
export'.
> I know that it was me who suggested this label.
>
> However, the sublabel mechanism supersedes this by giving more
> detailled info about problems and reasons for failure.
See above.
Nobody prevents us for using sublabels on suspendedTests.
> Thanks
>
> Günter
Kornel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
