Re: Replacing TAP test planning with done_testing()

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Replacing TAP test planning with done_testing()
Date: 2022-02-11 20:04:53
Message-ID: 0097EBBB-6178-432C-AA8D-214778BEAAF1@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 10 Feb 2022, at 01:58, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>>> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:

>>>> The attached patch removes all Test::More planning and instead ensures that all
>>>> tests conclude with a done_testing() call.

Pushed to master now with a few more additional hunks fixing test changes that
happened between posting this and now.

> Could it be possible to backpatch that even if
> this could be qualified as only cosmetic? Each time a test is
> backpatched we need to tweak the number of tests planned, and that may
> change slightly depending on the branch dealt with.

I opted out of backpatching for now, to solicit more comments on that. It's
not a bugfix, but it's also not affecting the compiled bits that we ship, so I
think there's a case to be made both for and against a backpatch. Looking at
the oldest branch we support, it seems we've done roughly 25 changes to the
test plans in REL_10_STABLE over the years, so it's neither insignificant nor
an everyday activity. Personally I don't have strong opinions, what do others
think?

--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-02-11 20:16:22 Re: Replacing TAP test planning with done_testing()
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2022-02-11 19:52:46 Re: postgres_fdw: using TABLESAMPLE to collect remote sample