QEP #5: stricter unit tests #7
Conversation
|
+1 As QA PSC member I fully endorse this proposal. Regards Tim |
|
As a representative of an organization using QGIS in production work I welcome every move that helps us having fewer regressions in upcoming releases. That's why we also support Matthias Kuhns work on test integration with github commits and PRs. Devs and organizations that contract with the devs should make sure enough time is allocated to work on these unit tests. Hopefully, this will lead to fewer bugs/regressions and less money that needs to be paid on the bug fixing work. |
|
@nyalldawson assigned number 5 to this QEP. Could you update the docs. Thanks |
| Generally, unit tests in either c++ or python are acceptable (or both). However, methods which involve transfer of ownership | ||
| of objects must include python tests to ensure that this transfer is handled correctly. | ||
|
|
||
| To enforece this requirement, commits which modify core and which are not accompanied by unit tests (or have been granted |
|
How can this QEP be moved on ? |
|
Superseded by #23 - I don't think we're quite ready for this one yet. |
|
No need to supersede, we can just leave it open until we are ready :-) |
|
Sorry, maybe I missed something. Why aren't we ready yet ? |
|
Because of the lack of a broad set of tests to build upon, a good set of rules of when this applies and acceptance in general IMHO. |
|
QEPs done via issues now. New ticket at #42 Sorry for the inconvenience. Email out soon on why. |
This proposal is aimed at providing more stable releases and preventing regressions in QGIS releases by expanding the coverage of unit tests and adopting a hard line approach to compulsory unit tests.