1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <rick.wesson@iidf.org>) id 1QnABX-0000Vc-Te
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 30 Jul 2011 14:06:35 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail-gy0-f175.google.com ([209.85.160.175])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1QnABW-0003VT-Kx
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 30 Jul 2011 14:06:35 +0000
Received: by gyd12 with SMTP id 12so3978424gyd.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sat, 30 Jul 2011 07:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.12.5 with SMTP id 5mr446661ybl.395.1312034788925; Sat, 30
Jul 2011 07:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.138.1 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Jul 2011 07:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP00+5GSPqoKmZgCw1huYNEuidjWgKGDdF-LG-zTaV8xXg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T3W=n6VVJfOUqcd52oYvd-5hSwdOJudtVHK4g0bPGpXew@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP00+5GSPqoKmZgCw1huYNEuidjWgKGDdF-LG-zTaV8xXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 07:06:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJ1JLttSv5RgKAfhOK-4k341NDuA+j4bsPgPWtO2Lxky6--e1w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rick Wesson <rick@support-intelligence.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1QnABW-0003VT-Kx
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Seeking advice: Encouraging bug-fixing
over new features
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 14:06:36 -0000
+1
Putting a bounty on the test framework might put some loose change to work.
http://code.google.com/p/googletest/ would be my choice
the list of c++ frameworks is at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unit_testing_frameworks#C.2B.2B
-rick
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> I've worked on open source projects for over 10 years now. This
> dynamic always exists but I've never seen it seriously kill a project.
>
> Thoughts:
>
> =A0- People who start out with features often stick around and become
> core contributors.
> =A0- Unit tests are critical.
>
> Now there's a basic skeleton for unit tests, the bug debt can start to
> be paid down by insisting that anyone who touches a piece of code
> introduces tests, whether it be for new features or refactorings.
> Insist patches won't be accepted without some new tests. In an
> untested codebase, adding or improving tests often reveals other bugs
> that then get fixed at the same time.
>
> People usually don't want to write tests if there's nothing there
> already. So I'd suggest seeding the test suite with a small number of
> simple tests for each part (wallet, net, db, etc). Once there are a
> few tests already it's easier to get people to add more. It's tempting
> to say, well, the wallet or re-org handling or whatever is the most
> critical so we'll write lots of tests for that first and do the rest
> later, but that's not as conducive to getting people to help.
>
> Most complex projects need some unit testing infrastructure to assist.
> For instance, the ability to use mock network connections or minimal
> difficulty chains. So if you build up that infrastructure and plant
> those seeds, it'll be easier for other people to flesh it out.
>
> Final thought - big test suites take a long time to grow, especially
> in codebases developed without them. A good start is a manually
> written test plan, that just walks you through the apps features.
> Insisting that a patch be signed off as passing the test plan is a
> good way to avoid gigantic breakages like the wallet encryption bug
> from cold start, at the cost of slowing down development (nobody likes
> doing manual test work over and over).
>
> I don't always follow my own advice on this and usually end up
> regretting it ....
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
> Got Input? =A0 Slashdot Needs You.
> Take our quick survey online. =A0Come on, we don't ask for help often.
> Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
|
