Re: cvs: pear /PEAR_Command_Packaging/tests/make-rpm-spec test1.outtest1.phpttest_option_rpm-depname.out test_option_rpm-depname.phpt
test_option_rpm-pkgname.outtest_option_rpm-pkgname.phpttest_option_rpm-release.out test_option_rpm-release.phpt

bertrand Gugger wrote: > Greg Beaver wrote: > >> bertrand Gugger wrote: >> >> >>> Are you dependent on Net_SMTP then ? >> >> >> >> Hi Bertrand, >> >> Not to jump Tim on this one, but he committed in tests, which have >> little to do with dependencies. :) >> >> Greg > > > Do you mean tests are allowed to require a package without introducing a > dependency ? > I ask it as I have a similar case and up to now I was reluctant to > introduce some more dependency just for tests, so I did not do it. > It's nice for me if it's allowed. I use as an example, the packages used by the PEAR_Installer test: http://cvs.php.net/viewcvs.cgi/pear-core/tests/PEAR_Installer/packages/ This is a short list. I would be more concerned if the tests were actually distributed with the PEAR package, but they are not. In fact, I wonder if it might make sense in some cases to have a package specifically for the unit tests? In Tim's case, this won't be necessary, since they only add a few KB to the package size. Large applications like phpDocumentor/PEAR/etc. may want to separate them from the primary package distribution. However, this is purely academic, as in Tim's case (and most likely your case) the bundled package would add an insignificant amount of size to the package. Greg