[darcs-users] patch: add makefile target named "disttest" which does the test currently written in _darcs/prefs/prefs

[Trent W. Buck]

"Eric Y. Kow" <eric.kow at gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 17:55:03 -0400, David Roundy wrote:
>> The maintainers can certainly use different settings for the test, but
>> I don't think there's a test that's much faster that will really help
>> significantly--except that we could skip the unit tests, which involve
>> code that is almost never touched.  In fact, with some work, we could
>> potentially only rerun the unit tests when code that affects them is
>> modified.  That could save a lot of time--but would be hard to code.
>
> I realise this may be a bit extreme, but maybe we could do away with the
> testpref altogether and just ask people to use a send prehook?
>
> That puts extra burden on us to test, but we're running the suite
> anyway.
>
> No strong feelings on this.  I think my hope was just to lower the
> barrier to entry for one-off contributors who may be suprised by the
> test suite being run.  "I just wanted to fix a typo!" or in Zooko's
> case, "make a ChangeLog entry!" (Zooko was not aware of --no-test, and I
> think the same may be true for many potential contributors)

Perhaps a better solution would be to have the test rule start by
printing

    To record without testing, add --no-test.