Bug triaging

[John A Meinel]

Martin Pool wrote:
> On 29/10/05, John A Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> wrote:
> 
>>> If we had a way to mark tests as 'expected to fail', we could
>>> differentiate between unfixed bugs and regressions.  So we could merge
>>> the tests into the mainline without causing test failures galore on
>>> normal runs.
>> I think this would be wonderful.
>>
>> What if we add new member functions:
>> self.knownFailIf()
>> self.knownFailUnless()
>>
>> I'm trying to think about how it should work. Since in one sense the
>> test should continue, even if the one section failed.
>> But it really depends on how the test is written (some would expect the
>> previous section to succeed in order to test the next section).
> 
> My thought was that these should raise special exceptions, to be
> caught by our unittest subclasses.  I'd also like to add one for
> 'skipped', for tests that e.g. can't be done on particular platforms.
> 
> So if someone wanted to run these on a different testrunner they'd
> just be reported as failures, which seems nice.

I agree. I would like to see:
if sys.platform == 'win32':
  raise Skipped()

And then the output wouldn't be OK, it would be SKIP, so that you would
know certain tests weren't being run.

John
=:->

> 
> --
> Martin
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051031/92a6fae7/attachment.pgp