Re: LuaJIT project governance

  • From: Aleksey Demakov <ademakov@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 01:05:15 +0600

The TAP protocol is both pretty simple and time tested. I'd suggest to adopt it.

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Alex Guo <chessnut@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

well, you can't cover everything with PASS or FAIL unit tests. Also consider
performance tests. Whether LuaJIT's performance regresses on any significant

From: william_a_adams@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: LuaJIT project governance
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 18:40:56 +0000

test framework?
Or at least a simple agreement on "returns 0 == success, returns '1' ==
failure", or something?

Some guidelines such as:
A single unit test should be fully independent and live in a single file
A unit test is responsible for setting up its environment and tearing it

-- William

- Shaping clay is easier than digging it out of the ground.

Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 10:30:47 -0700
Subject: Re: LuaJIT project governance
From: hibame@xxxxxxxxx
To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

I think a good start would be the list of things tested for if the test
code can not be shared. Just knowing the questions to ask and possibly
the answers can go a long way.

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Lesley De Cruz
<lesley.decruz+lj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:lesley.decruz+lj@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On 19 August 2015 at 00:31, Geoff Leyland
<geoff_leyland@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:geoff_leyland@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On 18/08/2015, at 9:02 pm, Vyacheslav Egorov (Redacted sender
"vegorov@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vegorov@xxxxxxxxxx>" for DMARC)

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:59 AM John Graham-Cumming
1. The test suite

I am happy to help transitioning the tests.

Likewise. I’d like to help where I can.

Same goes for me. How should we proceed, given that Mike's test suite
cannot be made public as-is due to license issues? Start collecting

Best regards,

Other related posts: