Re: Differential code coverage between 16 and HEAD

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Differential code coverage between 16 and HEAD
Date: 2024-04-16 01:35:53
Message-ID: 1072307.1713231353@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2024-04-15 at 17:05 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I don't at all like that the tests depend on downloading new unicode
>> data. What if there was an update but I just want to test the current
>> state?

> I was mostly following the precedent for normalization. Should we
> change that, also?

It's definitely not OK for the standard test suite to include
internet access. Seems like we need to separate "download new
source files" from "generate the derived files".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2024-04-16 01:50:14 Re: Differential code coverage between 16 and HEAD
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-04-16 01:33:34 Re: Bugs in ecpg's macro mechanism