Comments on: (No) Tickets, please! http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/ baking cakes with CakePHP Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:19:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: CakePHP Digest #5 | PseudoCoder.com http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-117351 CakePHP Digest #5 | PseudoCoder.com Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:09:07 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-117351 [...] (cakebaker) declaration of his framework free agency (on twitter too). But then his first post after this announcement was about CakePHP. Since that post launched a fairly long comment thread let’s skip right [...] [...] (cakebaker) declaration of his framework free agency (on twitter too). But then his first post after this announcement was about CakePHP. Since that post launched a fairly long comment thread let’s skip right [...]

]]> By: cakebaker http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-117063 cakebaker Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:09:22 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-117063 @Brandon: Well said :) @Brandon: Well said :)

]]> By: Brandon P http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116884 Brandon P Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:20:02 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116884 Dear CakePHP, Don't bit the hand that feeds you. Sincerely, Everyone who is just trying to help, Dear CakePHP,
Don’t bit the hand that feeds you.

Sincerely,
Everyone who is just trying to help,

]]> By: cakebaker http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116883 cakebaker Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:59:51 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116883 @Matt: Yes, that's not really encouraging to contribute and I really hope the cake devs will rethink the way they respond to tickets... @Matt: Yes, that’s not really encouraging to contribute and I really hope the cake devs will rethink the way they respond to tickets…

]]> By: Matt Huggins http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116826 Matt Huggins Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:25:58 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116826 I basically stopped submitting bugs after I realized how much extra work was required on my end. I thought I submitted a ton of info already, but it was marked as closed without any work because I didn't provide a test case, diff file, etc. I did it for one issue that I needed to have fixed, but it was too much effort for me to want to go through it again. I basically stopped submitting bugs after I realized how much extra work was required on my end. I thought I submitted a ton of info already, but it was marked as closed without any work because I didn’t provide a test case, diff file, etc. I did it for one issue that I needed to have fixed, but it was too much effort for me to want to go through it again.

]]> By: cakebaker http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116824 cakebaker Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:31:44 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116824 @Martin: *g* @Abhimanyu: It seems like the left hand doesn't know what the right hand does ;-) However, I think it is a good idea to ship the release without tests as probably most users of the release don't need them anyway. @Martin: *g*

@Abhimanyu: It seems like the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand does ;-) However, I think it is a good idea to ship the release without tests as probably most users of the release don’t need them anyway.

]]> By: Abhimanyu Grover http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116786 Abhimanyu Grover Thu, 08 Jan 2009 02:42:29 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116786 @cakebaker “For this release, we have removed the test files from the build [..]“ That is quite funny! @cakebaker

“For this release, we have removed the test files from the build [..]“

That is quite funny!

]]> By: Martin Westin http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116766 Martin Westin Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:10:32 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116766 I only found the line: "Test suite now integrated into the framework" and at first though that they sure had integrated it well since I could not find the files :) I only found the line: “Test suite now integrated into the framework” and at first though that they sure had integrated it well since I could not find the files :)

]]> By: cakebaker http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116754 cakebaker Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:47:00 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116754 @teknoid: Yes, there are tickets which waste everyone's time, but I don't think you can eliminate those tickets completely, even if you require tests. I agree with you that requiring tests will slow down things, but I don't think it will result in a better end-product. I don't see a connection between the quality of the end-product and the requirement of providing bug reports with tests. @Martin: No, that would be a bit overkill to provide a test for a test ;-) And regarding an almost empty cake/tests directory: the release doesn't contain the core tests, see the <a href="http://bakery.cakephp.org/articles/view/the-gift-of-1-2-final" rel="nofollow">announcement</a>: "For this release, we have removed the test files from the build [..]". @teknoid: Yes, there are tickets which waste everyone’s time, but I don’t think you can eliminate those tickets completely, even if you require tests.

I agree with you that requiring tests will slow down things, but I don’t think it will result in a better end-product. I don’t see a connection between the quality of the end-product and the requirement of providing bug reports with tests.

@Martin: No, that would be a bit overkill to provide a test for a test ;-)

And regarding an almost empty cake/tests directory: the release doesn’t contain the core tests, see the announcement: “For this release, we have removed the test files from the build [..]“.

]]> By: Martin Westin http://cakebaker.42dh.com/2009/01/02/no-tickets-please/comment-page-1/#comment-116735 Martin Westin Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:22:27 +0000 http://cakebaker.42dh.com/?p=1043#comment-116735 @cakebaker I can see the line-drawing being a problem but it does feel like a big waste of effort to write a NEW test case when an existing one does not do its job and should be fixed. It the function testSomething() (or its fixtures and other data) turns out to not cover every eventuality I think it is bad to require the creation of new fixtures and the function testSomethingAgainButCorrectlyThisTime() instead of correcting the existing code. The question was more: Should a new test case and new fixtures be created to illustrate a bug in a test case or a fixture? I had one of these situations myself. A destructive bug that was (IMHO with poor attitude) closed and re-closed on the grounds of "policy" with little regard for a the fact that it actually destroyed data in peoples applications. There was an existing test to cover bug, but it was not prefect. One (1) line added to the test's fixture revealed the bug and showed that the suggested patch fixed the bug and did not cause any other tests to fail. The accepted test eventually ended up being 30-40 lines of code identical to the existing test except that the corresponding fixture had that extra line. The bug was caught early (not by me, I found it a day later) but was open a lot longer that necessary (again IMHO). In the mean time causing several threads in the google group where people was wondering where their data had gone. I am not looking to bash on the core team, but I can see how the above may sound like it. I just want to illustrate that this door swings both ways. Requiring tests will definitely weed out a lot of "nonsense" but it will also slow down the time it takes for real bugs to be fixed. And I am currently in no position to submit any tests... since my cake/tests dir for 1.2 stable is almost empty. Anyone know where all the tests went? :) @cakebaker
I can see the line-drawing being a problem but it does feel like a big waste of effort to write a NEW test case when an existing one does not do its job and should be fixed.

It the function testSomething() (or its fixtures and other data) turns out to not cover every eventuality I think it is bad to require the creation of new fixtures and the function testSomethingAgainButCorrectlyThisTime() instead of correcting the existing code.

The question was more: Should a new test case and new fixtures be created to illustrate a bug in a test case or a fixture?

I had one of these situations myself. A destructive bug that was (IMHO with poor attitude) closed and re-closed on the grounds of “policy” with little regard for a the fact that it actually destroyed data in peoples applications.

There was an existing test to cover bug, but it was not prefect. One (1) line added to the test’s fixture revealed the bug and showed that the suggested patch fixed the bug and did not cause any other tests to fail. The accepted test eventually ended up being 30-40 lines of code identical to the existing test except that the corresponding fixture had that extra line.

The bug was caught early (not by me, I found it a day later) but was open a lot longer that necessary (again IMHO). In the mean time causing several threads in the google group where people was wondering where their data had gone.

I am not looking to bash on the core team, but I can see how the above may sound like it.
I just want to illustrate that this door swings both ways. Requiring tests will definitely weed out a lot of “nonsense” but it will also slow down the time it takes for real bugs to be fixed.

And I am currently in no position to submit any tests… since my cake/tests dir for 1.2 stable is almost empty. Anyone know where all the tests went? :)

]]>