james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Harmeet Bedi" <harm...@kodemuse.com>
Subject Re: cvs commit: jakarta-james/src/java/org/apache/james/testing runtest.bat runtest.sh testconf.xml
Date Sun, 13 Oct 2002 22:12:55 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter M. Goldstein" <peter_m_goldstein@yahoo.com>
To: "'James Developers List'" <james-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:56 AM
Subject: RE: cvs commit: jakarta-james/src/java/org/apache/james/testing
runtest.bat runtest.sh testconf.xml

> Harmeet,
> > > Yes, it was.  It was a modification to the existing code base.
> Ergo, it
> > > was a patch.  That's why we use the [PATCH] flag.
> >
> > There is no need to be nuts over code that is for testing and
> proposals.
> >
> > PATCH is reference to production code not test code.
> >
> > If you care about bundling ~10k or so test files in production jar
> file,
> > the
> > right fix is to remove testing package from build file. Please note
> that
> > would be a change from what has been around for a long time. I don't
> think
> > it is worth doing, but again if you feel so strongly about it.
> You are once again missing the point.  There is a reason to be nuts
> about testing and proposals.  Because it's shared code.
> Test code needs to be well documented so it can be understood by others.
> When it's checked into the core code base it's considered ready for
> prime time and thus needs to meet all the requirements of core code.  By
> point 4, that means javadoc.
> Proposal code does need to be well documented, eventually.  That's why
> it's proposal, and that's why I said you could shove whatever you wanted
> into proposals/test-suite.  It just won't be moved to the core code base
> until it meets standards.  That's how it's supposed to work so we have a
> maintainable code base while allowing for flexible development.
> > I was trying to make sense of your action and attempting to be nice.
> > testing
> > package is where test code has been going from start.
> > I haven't seen you suggest any other location and you seem to have
> > arbitrarily decided what inappropriate is.
> > Your actions are very inappropriate.
> No, I haven't.  I've followed the rules of the system.  You placed .sh,
> .bat, and .xml files in a directory entitled src/java.  That's a hint.
> Source files.  Source files related to java.  That means those files are
> inappropriate.
> I voted a '-1', after you checked the files in without posting them for
> review.  As a committer, I retain that right.  You, for some bizarre
> reason, couldn't understand my objections but told me to delete them if
> I felt that strongly.  I did and I did.
> That's exactly appropriate.
> > You want javadocs on test methods ? The point #4 was ment to push
> > develepors
> > in a direction not act as justification for removing files. You are
> > picking
> > things out of context and using it to justify abuse.
> >
> > That too on code that is only for testing.
> Who said?  I am reading a sentence that's in English.  Are you?  Unless
> I'm missing some sort of secret subtext, it's pretty clear.  Javadocs on
> all methods.  Not Javadocs on all methods but the ones Harmeet doesn't
> want to javadoc.  Your interpretation is simply incorrect.  All methods.
> Clear as day to me.

All right Peter, will add javadocs. I would use -1 on these kind of tests
and removing files more prudently but as you said you have the right.

Hope this resolves this matter.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message