[MERGE] Move the notes on writing tests out of HACKING into a new file, and improve them.

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Robert Collins wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 14:39 +1000, Andrew Bennetts wrote:
> 
>> This text happens to be untouched by my patch, just moved as-is!  So, I think
>> forcing people to re-read it is paying off ;)
>>
>> I'd be happy to ditch TestPlatformLimit from this file.  The table a bit below
>> suggests that the intended distinction is that when running the test suite in
>> “strict” mode a test skipped platform limit will pass, but a test skipped due to
>> an unavailable feature will fail.  We seem to be doing just fine without having
>> implemented this distinction, so we probably shouldn't weigh our docs down with
>> it.
>>
>> Hmm, I see looking at that table that a couple of places in this file say
>> “TestDependencyMissing” (which doesn't exist) when they should say
>> “UnavailableFeature” (which does).  I'll fix that.
> 
> I think that instructions-on-use should not refer to TODO's :). So yes,
> my vote is to remove it. If we want such a distinction, someone can file
> a patch which actually adds it.
> 
> -Rob
> 

Just to mention, I think that we do need this, and it is a limitation of
the current implementation that we don't have it.

I would *really* like to see PQM run in --strict mode because it is easy
enough to get silent failures (I suppose XFAIL would be something that
should not fail PQM regardless.)

PQM *should* have all necessary dependencies installed, and *should* be
passing all tests.

But it isn't going to handle specific win32 cases (like having
FindFilesEx, etc.)

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkii5WUACgkQJdeBCYSNAAPQfACffxJbGNxJ1jouED/Nx9Qlm4dy
bn4An39P/kVsFGF0b/FQ+/049FMldur2
=aTuZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----