W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom-ts@w3.org > August 2001

RE: [General] Status?

From: Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 12:26:37 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <15220.2877.611672.473769@cj42289-a.reston1.va.home.com>
To: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
Cc: "'www-dom-ts@w3.org'" <www-dom-ts@w3.org>

Arnold, Curt writes:
 > However, since we don't have a buildable product at this time and
 > having the initial test load in any form is valuable, I'd be in
 > favor of your committing the tests in their current condition and
 > we as a team can make the necessary changes to the test cases or
 > transforms.


 > DOM Level 1 tests definitions should be added to
 > 2001/DOM-Test-Suite/tests/level1/core, corresponding test files
 > should added to 2001/DOM-Test-Suite/files/level1/core.

  This makes me think that the test files should ride along with the
tests, possibly in a subdir:  tests in .../tests/level1/core, files in
.../tests/level1/core/files (or data).  Maintaining two sets of
directories seems pretty artificial.

 > The CVS will insert the update log within the element.  This could
 > also be copied to the generated tests.  This would require that you
 > avoid using &, > or <'s in the update comments.

  I think people will have very divergent opinions on this.  My
thought on it is that CVS is very good at keeping track of this stuff,
and it's easy enough to get out of CVS using "cvs log", so adding it
to the test seems extraneous.  It may be that it makes more sense here
than in "normal" application development.  (I'd sure hate to get the
150+ entry logs for many of the files I work with!)
  If we do decide we want it, though, we should probably use:


This gives us fewer restrictions in the checkin comments, at least.


Fred L. Drake, Jr.  <fdrake at acm.org>
PythonLabs at Zope Corporation
Received on Friday, 10 August 2001 12:29:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:34:03 UTC