[PEPr] Comment on RFC::Unit tests, new packages, good practice

Michael Gauthier (http://pear.php.net/user/gauthierm) has commented on the proposal for RFC::Unit tests, new packages, good practice. Comment: I think these are all great best practices and this should be included in the PEAR manual under "testing". A section on how to make your tests easily integrate with the PEAR CI server would save lots of headaches. I'm hesitant to require all of these points for new packages, as it would likely turn contributors away. The amount of work required to write comprehensive unit tests is sometimes more work than writing the package in the first place. For example, Crypt_GPG's tests are a thousands of lines longer (excluding comments) than the library code itself. I think requiring the conventions in 8, 11, 12 and 13 makes sense as they're things that make it easier to write tests, but don't involve actually writing tests. This would make it easier for the QA team to build or improve tests for packages. Proposal information: http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=585 -- Sent by PEPr, the automatic proposal system at http://pear.php.net