[darcs-users] [patch371] Implement a test-framework-based shell h... (and 3 more)
kowey at darcs.net
Wed Sep 1 10:32:52 UTC 2010
Thanks for the review Simon! It's nice to see some more review voices;
I hope we can find more guest reviewers, more regularly (and grow the
Review Team over time)
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:15:07 -0700, Simon Michael wrote:
> >hunk ./darcs.cabal 604
> > filepath == 1.1.*,
> > QuickCheck >= 220.127.116.11,
> > HUnit >= 1.0,
> >+ cmdlib >= 0.2.1 && < 0.3,
> -1. I know you have your reasons and this is just the test runner,
> not darcs itself, but I think cmdargs will succeed and it would be
> better to use/improve that.
I think it would be nice to have a list outlining the reasons we
currently prefer cmdlib to cmdargs. Simon's right that we should
default to the most viable candidate unless we have a good reason,
and since we appear to have some good reasons, it'd be nice if they
I suggest the most neutral way to do would by for cmdlib to provide
a bullet pointed list of differences between with cmdargs, and for
Darcs to just provide a link plus the things that matter for us.
Anyway, this is a non-blocker. We can always switch back if we later
learn that actually cmdargs is a better fit.
> >+ shellish == 0.1.*,
> The hackage page says "safety is sacrificed". Anything to be
> concerned about ? Will darcs tests built on this be reliable and
> deterministic ?
> > test-framework >= 0.2.2,
> > test-framework-hunit >= 0.2.2,
> > test-framework-quickcheck2 >= 0.2.2
> +1. However, new packages (the 5 above) bring compatibility
> headaches. It looks like all these "should" work on windows, but
> until tested we should probably assume extra installation hassles
> for darcs developers on that platform. Likewise for folks wanting to
> build tests with GHC 6.10.
I appreciate these reservations. I think the only thing we can do is
test it out on a build slave.
Meanwhile, I'm going to greenlight the bundle up to the patch that makes
-ftest mandatory. Once we've determined that darcs-test is easy to
build on Windows, we can flip the switch.
> Summary: a good, high-value change, with concerns about the use of
> cmdlib and about unclear platform/compiler compatibility impact.
Another problem is conflicts in the darcs.cabal file with the patch
that makes -ftest mandatory.
If Petr could provide a conflict-fix patch (against mainline for now,
please), and if we knew more about installing this on Windows, then
it can go in at his leisure.
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
For a faster response, try +44 (0)1273 64 2905 or
xmpp:kowey at jabber.fr (Jabber or Google Talk only)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the darcs-users