|
|
|
|
|
by steveklabnik
188 days ago
|
|
No. Because the tests that don’t pass are edge cases and corners that most people wouldn’t notice. It’s arguably more important to fix bugs that impact actual usage, so it can be a valid strategy to do this even before you hit 100% coverage, to help you prioritize the remaining bugs to fix. In other words, there may be more serious bugs not in the test suite than the ones that aren’t passing that are in the suite. And you only find that out through real usage. |
|
This standard may be justified when there is significant benefit. There is not in this case. And some projects have stricter standards.[1]
> In other words, there may be more serious bugs not in the test suite than the ones that aren’t passing that are in the suite. And you only find that out through real usage.
You should assume everyone understands how Ubuntu's decision would benefit this project. You should assume most Ubuntu users do not care. You replied to a comment which told you this before.[2]
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46267541