Re: Feasibility of folding `unit-tests` into `make test`, was Re: [PATCH] ci: avoid running the test suite _twice_

From: phillip.wood123@gmail.com <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 16, 2023, 15:05 UTC
Message-ID: <4d5f5b5f-d30e-4edc-976e-f11e837545f6@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <850ea42c-f103-68d5-896b-9120e2628686@gmx.de>

On 16/11/2023 08:42, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023, Josh Steadmon wrote:
>> On 2023.11.13 13:49, Jeff King wrote:
>> We could bundle all the unit tests into a single shell script, but then
>> we lose parallelization and add hoops to jump through to determine what
>> breaks. Or we could autogenerate a corresponding shell script to run
>> each individual unit test, but that seems gross. Of course, these are
>> hypothetical concerns for now, since we only have a single unit test at
>> the moment.
> 
> I totally agree with you, Josh, that it makes little sense to
> try to contort the unit tests to be run in the same `prove` run as the
> regression tests that need to be invoked so totally differently.

FWIW that's my feeling too. It makes sense for "make test" to run the unit tests, but wrapping the unit tests in one or more shell scripts adds unnecessary complexity.

Best Wishes

Phillip