[darcs-users] darcs patch: Add a test case for issue1110.

[David Roundy]

On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Simon Michael <simon at joyful.com> wrote:
> Review: just a test, looks good, +1.
>
> My other thought is about our test naming policy. I wonder if we will
> end up with a test named after every issue, duplicating "regular" tests
> named after what they test ? In this case, was there no existing test
> for getting hashed repos ? As issue tests proliferate will it be harder
> to find and understand tests ? Should we ever consider
> renaming/consolidating them ?

Eventually, renaming them might help--provided their contents refer to
the issue, so we can easily look up the context describing what the
test was designed to demonstrate.

But in general, many smaller tests is better than a few big tests
(e.g. a get.sh test that verifies every aspect of get).  It makes it
easier to see what is going on when the test fails.  And of course, if
it doesn't fail, then you won't be bothered by the test.  A test that
fits on my screen is just perfect.

David