On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:21:18PM -0400, Bob Rogers wrote: > From: James E Keenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:55:02 -0400 > > Yes, when one of the 'make codingstd_tests' accumulates sufficient > PASSes, we promote it to 'make test'. Those that are not yet passing > can generally be described as: "Requires cage-cleaner with vast number > of tuits." > . . . > So, no, failures in these files are not from showstoppers. They're a > TODO for my golden years (and those of several other Parrot developers). > > I committed a fuller explanation in r30292.
Perhaps "make fulltest" should run the "make codetest" target instead of "make codingstd_tests"? The "codetest" target is the one that means "run the codingstd tests that are part of 'make test'". This would allow "make fulltest" to still run the required subset of coding standard tests (i.e., the same ones as "make test") without having to run the entire codingstd suite (which produces the ignorable failures). And we can remove the note from the release_manager guide entirely, since "make fulltest" will run exactly what we want (and any errors in coding tests are then significant). Pm
