On 07/23/2009 11:00 AM, dan nessett wrote:
So far no one has responded to my question about how --ktf-to-fail should interact with
--compare and --record. Also, at least one commenter has suggested a different name for
--ktf-to-fail. Before I open a bug and attach the patches, I would like to resolve these
issues. Since Brion suggested this task, would he comment?
Offhand I'm not sure I see a need for a switch specifically.
Couple thoughts offhand:
* There appears to already be a "disabled" option which can be added to
test cases. Since this already exists, it doesn't need to be developed
and could simply be added to the tests we know don't currently work.
* If there's a desire to run those tests anyway, I'd probably call the
option --run-disabled. This should be easy to add.
* Not sure there's any need for specific handling w/ compare and record;
we can just record whatever we run.
If on the other hand we want to run and record these tests, but not
whinge at the user about them, then we'd want another option on them.
Probably just having another completion state for the output would do it
(grouping known-to-fail tests separately from others that fail). I'm not
sure how important that is, though.
-- brion