Tres Seaver <tseaver@palladion.com> wrote:
> >
> > �> That doesn't work so well at a sprint, where the point is to maximize
> > �> the value of precious face-time to get stuff done *now*.
> >
> > That's where the D in DVCS comes in. �It's a new world, friends. �All
> > you need to do is bring a $50 wireless router to the sprint, and have
> > some volunteer set up a shared repo for the sprinters. �Then some
> > volunteer *later* runs the tests and pilots the patches into the
> > public repo. �Where's the latency?
>
> The current full test suite is punishingly expensive to run, sprint or
> not. �Because of that fact, people will defer running it, and sometimes
> forget. �Trying to require that people run it repeatedly during a push
> race is just Canute lashing the waves.

Punishingly expensive?
You have to remember that Python is an entire programming language with
its standard library, used by millions of people. That its test suite
can run on 4 minutes on a modern computer actually makes it rather
"fast" IMO (and, perhaps, incomplete...).

+1
Having experience running [= suffering from] multiple-hour (and sometimes weekend-long) tests for some systems, Python's test suite feels slender. Even surprisingly so. I often wonder how such a relatively short set of tests can exercise a project as big and full of functionality as Python with its whole standard library.
">

(original) (raw)

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 16:33, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:46:37 -0400

Tres Seaver <tseaver@palladion.com> wrote:
> >
> > �> That doesn't work so well at a sprint, where the point is to maximize
> > �> the value of precious face-time to get stuff done \*now\*.
> >
> > That's where the D in DVCS comes in. �It's a new world, friends. �All
> > you need to do is bring a $50 wireless router to the sprint, and have
> > some volunteer set up a shared repo for the sprinters. �Then some
> > volunteer \*later\* runs the tests and pilots the patches into the
> > public repo. �Where's the latency?
>
> The current full test suite is punishingly expensive to run, sprint or
> not. �Because of that fact, people will defer running it, and sometimes
> forget. �Trying to require that people run it repeatedly during a push
> race is just Canute lashing the waves.

Punishingly expensive?
You have to remember that Python is an entire programming language with
its standard library, used by millions of people. That its test suite
can run on 4 minutes on a modern computer actually makes it rather
"fast" IMO (and, perhaps, incomplete...).

+1
Having experience running \[= suffering from\] multiple-hour (and sometimes weekend-long) tests for some systems, Python's test suite feels slender. Even surprisingly so. I often wonder how such a relatively short set of tests can exercise a project as big and full of functionality as Python with its whole standard library.


Eli