[Sugar-devel] Requiring test coverage for new code

[Simon Schampijer]

On 05/18/2013 07:36 PM, Manuel Quiñones wrote:
> 2013/5/18 Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>:
>> On 17 May 2013 15:13, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Simon, Manuel,
>>>
>>> any feedback about this? I see a few possible levels
>>>
>>> 1 Everything, bugfixes included
>>> 2 Every feature patch
>>> 3 Every patch to the new html/javascript code
>>> 4 Nothing, leave it to the contributor willingness
>>
>>
>> Summarizing the positions expressed in the thread
>>
>> Simon would like 1.
>> Marco would do 2 and then consider if we can move to 1.
>> Manuel would like 2.
>> Walter would be happy with 2, as long as there is guidance.
>> Gonzalo and James doesn't seem happy about requiring tests at all.
>>
>> I suppose Simon and Manuel needs to talk and make a decision. These are the
>> times when it's nice to have maintainers and not be one :P
>
> I have expressed my opinion favouring testing, so 2 or 1 would be fine for me.

I would say, let's start with 2: Every feature patch, then we can move 
to 1 gradually.

> I would also like to express my view on contributions.  We should not
> block any valuable contribution.
>
> Suppose that a child finds a bug, then modifies a file in the XO and
> then sends the modified file to us in a email with a brief
> description.  Very welcome! I would say.
>
> For this kind of occasional contributions, we (regular contributors)
> should take over and do the procedure by ourselves, and also add the
> testing.

Yes, that sounds very good to me. If this guy sends in another patch we 
can start to guide him through the review process. For a 
one-hit-patch-wonder we can keep things simple.

> Also as Walter pointed, indeed we need to provide guidance to the
> contributors.  And the review process is good for that.
>
> --
> .. manuq ..
>

Simon