Re: Perlbugtron interface mods

> > Why does the bugtron need to support tests?  Why cannot they just be
> > included as part of messages?
> Tony?

There's nothing forcing this.  The big win is that it enables you to
automate maintenance of the bug repository.  What I'm thinking of is a
process that once a week or so builds bleedperl, runs all the tests in the
repository and does the following:

1) If all the tests assigned to a specific bug pass, proposes that the bug
be closed
2) If a test fails which is assigned to no open bugs, it creates a new bug
report.

> > How will these tests be added?  Who will add them?  How much human
> > intervention will be necessary?  Do they fit into the current
> > structure?
> The way I see it is much like a patch.
>
> You _can_ throw patches and tests and bugs, and you can throw tests at
patches
> (possibly more likely), etc. but there is no requirement to do so, or for
them
> to pass any particular criteria.  Much like a patch.

I agree.  Tests would be 100% optional and would be there to make life
easier for the admins.  If the admins don't think it would help them, then
it's probably not worth the effort.

>
> I like the idea of a bug being a bug and not a ticket, myself, and this is
> kind of a good excuse to migrate away from the -t thing.

You've lost me here.

++t