-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.2k
Closed
Labels
discussIssues opened for discussions and feedbacks.Issues opened for discussions and feedbacks.testIssues and PRs related to the tests.Issues and PRs related to the tests.
Description
Would it be useful to have a Testing WG? Things a WG might do:
- OMG fix all those flaky tests.
- Create some guidelines around tests. (For example, when should a file containing multiple tests be split into multiple files?)
- Maybe work with the Build WG on the issue of buildbot failures, although I suspect the Build WG is all over that problem. (But just in case: Is there a way to test for buildbot failures? Automate notification to relevant parties so they can be fixed promptly? Is there a way to automate retry when a buildbot fails? Maybe a Test WG can be given limited privileges on the CI infrastructure such that the tedious/mechanistic elements of dealing with buildbot failures can be delegated to them?)
- Maybe see about porting as much of the Python test harness code to Node as is sensible.
Anyone interested?
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
discussIssues opened for discussions and feedbacks.Issues opened for discussions and feedbacks.testIssues and PRs related to the tests.Issues and PRs related to the tests.