httpd-test-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <>
Subject Re: [patch] autogeneration of TEST/SMOKE/REPORT
Date Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:18:27 GMT
Doug MacEachern wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
>>This patch removes the need for t/TEST.PL, t/SMOKE.PL, build/
>>and implements in each set of the classes used by these scripts a
>>generate_script() method, which generates these scripts.

>>- If you try to generate t/SMOKE for ModPerl-Registry it'll need a
>>different 'use lib' adjustments.
> you could pass a \@libs arg to the generate methods that are added to the
> 'use lib ...'

probably, but see below.

>>So it's not than much re-usable after all. Are you sure that we really
>>want this to be done in the way this patch does and not just to stick with
>>.PL scripts? I really prefer a the .PL scripts because of their easy
> i mainly wanted to see the bugreport stuff be re-usable in a module,
> rather than having to copy a .pl script around to each project.  having
> the methods to generate t/{TEST,SMOKE,REPORT} are just a bonus.  if a
> project needs to customize more, then they just don't use the generation
> methods.

I've almost committed the stuff, but then I've tried to apply it to 
httpd-test/perl-framework's t/TEST and couldn't do it because t/TEST had:

%Apache::TestConfig::Argv = qw(apxs /home/stas/httpd/prefork/bin/apxs);

which is not generic (and the same goes for t/SMOKE, but it doesn't need 

Apache-Test/t/ has a very non-generic t/TEST

I suppose that t/REPORT and t/SMOKE are the only ones that are simple 
and can be re-used. I really doubt whether we have any added value in 
abstracting t/TEST.

How about if I do this abstraction for SMOKE and REPORT but leave 
TEST.PL as is?

Stas Bekman             JAm_pH      --   Just Another mod_perl Hacker      mod_perl Guide

View raw message