Re: Comments on Mathias blog post about contributing

Frank Schoenheit <frank.schoenheit <at> sun.com> writes:

> Don't think this is a good idea, since a test can be broken in different
> ways. For instance, if your test checks 10 aspects, and one of them is
> broken in MWS, you still want to know if the other 9 are okay in your
> CWS. Otherwise, you'll notice a breakage in those 9 only when the one
> failure is fixed, and the whole test re-enabled in MWS.
If a test checks for 10 things at once and in an atomic operation it is broken
by design anyway. That would need to be fixed thus eliminating the problem,
IMHO.

Best Regards,

Bjoern