[darcs-users] perl library convenience copies in tests/lib

Trent W. Buck trentbuck at gmail.com
Sat Oct 4 04:53:12 UTC 2008

Eric Kow <kowey at darcs.net> writes:

>> Therefore, I'd like these convenience copies to just be deleted from
>> the codebase.  Those people who run the tests can simply use apt or
>> whatever, just like they already need to do for quickcheck2 and
>> haskell dependencies of the tests.
> Well, it seems a lot of darcs developers are on Debian or a
> Debian-based system.  Do you think you could provide instructions on
> how to get our hands on the relevant perl libraries (i.e. what
> packages to install via apt, and what via cpan?)

Sure, but I didn't/don't want to spend time on the details if there's a
good reason to leave those convenience libraries around.  For example,
maybe cpan(1) doesn't work on Windows.

>> Does anyone have an opinion on the proposed course of action (rm -r
>> tests/lib)?
> Not sure.  One difference between the functional tests (sh/perl) and
>the unit tests (quickcheck) is a really low barrier to entry is vital
>to the functional tests.

I assume you're talking about a low barrier of entry to *running* the
tests, rather than writing them.  Needing to explicitly apt-get install
some libfoo-perl packages before being able to run the test raises the
barrier slightly, but IMO not a lot.  But what about other systems?
Maybe cpan(1) doesn't work very well on Windows, and there are
Windows-based developers who run the functional tests.

I guess what is really important is: who is running each kind of test?
Are the perl libraries needed by

  - darcs hackers who use 'darcs record --test';
  - buildbots (after compiling); or merely
  - darcs hackers who explicitly run the functional tests?

If the perl libraries are needed by casual darcs hackers who just want
to record and send a patch, and a lot of developers use systems that
can't easily apt/cpan the perl libraries, then there's a strong case for
leaving the convenience copies.  But if it's only needed by buildbots
and serious darcs hackers, then maybe we can get rid of them and just
tell people what cpan/apt commands to run.

> Perhaps this calls for a radical shellification of the perl tests,
> getting rid of the Perl suite entirely (this may mean, for example,
> replacing some of the fancier tests with Haskell)

I'm certainly open to translating existing perl-based tests into bash or
Haskell, too.

More information about the darcs-users mailing list