-1 test included-wording

[Gary Murry <gm...@yahoo-inc.com>]

Hi,

I would like to propose a change in the wording automatically generated by Hudson when it believes updates for unit testing are missing in a patch.  The current wording is          "-1 tests included.  The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests.  Please justify why no tests are needed for this patch."  The new wording I would propose is "-1 tests include.  The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified test.  Please justify why no tests are needed for this patch.  Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch."  Normally the unit tests are the record of how things are verified.  This will give us a history for those patches that are missing this.

Thanks,

-Gary

Re: -1 test included-wording

[Nigel Daley <nd...@yahoo-inc.com>]

On May 22, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Gary Murry wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a change in the wording automatically  
> generated by Hudson when it believes updates for unit testing are  
> missing in a patch.  The current wording is
> "-1 tests included.  The patch doesn't appear to include any new or  
> modified tests.  Please justify why no tests are needed for this  
> patch."
>
> The new wording I would propose is
> "-1 tests include.  The patch doesn't appear to include any new or  
> modified test.  Please justify why no tests are needed for this  
> patch.  Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify  
> this patch."

Slight reduction in wording:
> "-1 tests include.  The patch doesn't appear to include any new or  
> modified test.  Please justify why no tests are needed for this  
> patch and what manual steps were performed to verify it."

+1 on adding the manual test request.

Nige