From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: [BUG] ob-sql.el: probably an extra paren Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 14:41:27 +0100 Message-ID: <87fvzozx88.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <16047.1363748067@alphaville> <86vc8mtfcx.fsf@somewhere.org> <87fvzqnpfd.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51340) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UIfkU-0004g5-Td for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 09:41:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UIfkS-0006cP-Kg for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 09:41:42 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]:65089) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UIfkS-0006c6-Em for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 09:41:40 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f175.google.com with SMTP id c10so1211343wiw.8 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 06:41:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Achim Gratz's message of "Thu, 21 Mar 2013 09:28:12 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Achim Gratz Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Achim, Achim Gratz writes: >> If anyone knows how to setup an automated tests framework for Org, >> feel free to go ahead, we will use it and monitor broken tests to >> see what's wrong in the code or in the tests or in the environment >> running the tests. > > We already have one, The test are not automatic, they are manually triggered, so we don't have an "automated tests framework" -- or am I misunderstanding what an automated test framework is? > what Nick and Sebastien are asking is not to push > commits that are known to not pass the tests. This I 100% agree with. I don't push commits that are known to me as not passing the tests :) >> Testing is a nice habit to have, but let's not make it a coercive >> pre-requisit before pushing patches. > > Why not? Any broken commits make automatic bisecting impossible and they > are a constant source of irritation for folks who forget to test their new > Org pulls before using or installing them. > >> My whole thinking here is well captured by Rich Hickey: > > The citation you gave doesn't even apply to the question at hand. It is > about writing tests, not using the tests you already have. It is about life being short and time being spent on testing vs coding. If you can come up with a pre-push hook that is clever enough to distinguish trivial-and-safe changes against those who need to be tested, please submit one. A trivial-and-safe change is either: - a change against non-code files; - a change in docstring. I don't think this is easy to do. Rich message wrt tests is: "Life is short, decide whether you want to spend it on testing or coding" -- so I think it's relevant here. I often have only 10 minutes at hand, make a few trivial changes, and push. For me, a mandatory pre-push hook running the test suite would be a useless burden for 50% of my commits. This would irritate me. We might agree to disagree on this. -- Bastien