| From: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, decibel(at)decibel(dot)org, bruno(at)wolff(dot)to |
| Subject: | Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto |
| Date: | 2007-02-11 13:40:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20070211084020.8b7bb18a.darcy@druid.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 10:36:56 +0100
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > I'm not concerned so much about the runtime as the development and
> > maintenance effort...
>
> Shouldn't we at least add the one or two exemplary statements that
> failed so we have some sort of coverage of the problem?
How about a rule that says no new ode without a test? That's one of
the ways that extreme programming is applied to new projects.
Basically what that means is that bugs continue to be found but we
never see the same bug twice because the regression test catches those.
Of course, while you are creating one test you can always add a few
related ones.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tino Wildenhain | 2007-02-11 14:10:03 | Re: XML export |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-02-11 12:53:50 | Re: XML export |