Re: Re: On PEAR quality issues and natural selection

Greg Beaver wrote:

My point is this: if we don't even have time to properly review a package prior to including it PEAR, how in sam hill are we going to properly QA it after it's in?

Ok maybe MDB2 is an extreme example. For every method I would need to include this many tests: - one for success - one for failure - a few for extreme values - multiply by portability modes - multiply by different methods For example I have method that behave different based on portability mode. I have had bugs due to using limit incombination with numRows and a certain type of fetch afterwards. So what I am saying is this: Its alot of work to really cover your API. Its a worthwhile cause of course. Generally however reality shows me that most wierd combinations I dont even think up. So in the end I write a test case for every bug found and so my test suite slowly improves. regards, Lukas Smith smith@backendmedia.com _______________________________ BackendMedia www.backendmedia.com berlin@backendmedia.com Linn Zwoch Smith GbR Pariser Str. 44 D-10707 Berlin Tel +49 30 83 22 50 00 Fax +49 30 83 22 50 07