[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] [PATCH] [0/1] doc/developer: Alternative to making tests a requirement.

[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] [PATCH] [0/1] doc/developer: Alternative to making tests a requirement.

[Michael Niedermayer]

Changing the tests to a requirement, while it seems to have overwhelming support
did have 2 developers, who seemed not to like it.

This is an alternative suggestion, please comment what you think.
Is this better for the project in your opinion or worse ?

thx



_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".

[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] doc/developer: Alternative to making tests a requirement.

[Michael Niedermayer]

Making tests a strict requirement could increase the burden on new
developers. This is an alternative

Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
---
 doc/developer.texi | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/doc/developer.texi b/doc/developer.texi
index 0c2f2cd7d1..c7536a17b6 100644
--- a/doc/developer.texi
+++ b/doc/developer.texi
@@ -809,6 +809,8 @@ Consider adding a regression test for your code. All new modules
 should be covered by tests. That includes demuxers, muxers, decoders, encoders
 filters, bitstream filters, parsers. If its not possible to do that, add
 an explanation why to your patchset, its ok to not test if theres a reason.
+If your module lacks a test, then you must provide all information and samples
+which are needed for someone else to create a test, limited by what you possess.
 
 @item
 If you added YASM code please check that things still work with --disable-yasm.
-- 
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".