Re: [Oorexx-devel] [Discuss] Header data in testGroup files

[Rick M. <obj...@gm...>]

On Jan 16, 2008 3:35 PM, Lee Peedin <le...@sa...> wrote:

> Mark M & I decided to bring this to the list for open discussion.  Each
> existing testGroup has a lot
> of information that is not really used.  I think we already agree that
> it's really not necessary,
> but would like other's opinions.
>
>    name:             template01.testGroup
> That's pretty obvious without being listed in the file


Agree

>
>
>    authors:          <name>
> Seems a bit vane to me


A lot of open source projects in fact, have a direct statement against
having author identification.  This is a community effort, not the work of a
single person.  For example, the Apache Software Foundation works that way.
The existence of author information might actually discourage people from
attempting to make updates.


>
>
>    date:             <date>
>    version:          0.0.0
>    changed:
> SVN tracks all of this, and also who committed/changed the file


I agree.  Manual changes of this sort are generally ALWAYS out of date
because nobody remembers to update it.


>
>
>
>    languageLevel:    6.0
> Current directory structure of the testGroups "dictates" this


Yep.


>
>
>    purpose:          A simple template file for starting test groups.
>                      <put your purpose above>
> May be useful, if the file name isn't clear enough


Eh, I can go either way.  Generally, this is only useful if it's a longer
description of what's in the file (like an explanation that it is testing a
string method vs the equivalent string BIF and the implications of that).


>
>
>
>    remark:           <put any extra remarks here.  not necessarily
> needed.>
>
>                      <search and replace template.testGroup
>                       with the real test group name>
>
>                      You do *not* need to name your test case class the
> same as
>                      the file.  You can of course if you want to.
>
>                      <strip out this remark section>
> May have some use, but again, the SVN commit comment should be sufficient


Yep

>
>
>
>    license:          CPL 1.0 (Common Public License v1.0, see below)
> Just make this part of the Copyright comment


Yep...generally, the more the boilerplate is common, the easier it is to
update when necessary.

>
>
>    link:
> ???
>
>    category1:        ooRexx
>    category2:        Base
>    category3:        Template
> Directory structure replaces the need for this.


Agree

>
>
> Your thoughts appreciated.
>
> BTW: Don't start writing testGroups with the above left out UNTIL a
> decision is made by the group.
> Besides the current framework will choke.
>
> Lee
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Oorexx-devel mailing list
> Oor...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>