splitting off bindings [was: Re: patch to TODO]

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 10:40:55PM -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 03:50 +0200, Robert McQueen wrote:
> > [snip stuff that sounds good]
> 
> All sounds great to me, if no objections then please feel free to go for
> it. The only thing I'd be sad about is if we lost some of the test
> coverage due to untangling the glib bindings. I think I'd rather leave
> those in the tree if it's too hard to disentangle them without breaking
> various test stuff and tools.

I've not looked closely at the glib bindings / their tests, but I'd
be surprised if we were not able to match the level of testing they 
currently get. In addition, we've discussed defining a standard test
service/client pair which will let us to put together a comprehensive 
inter-operability test matrix of all bindings. Our thought is that
we'd have a testrig to run the inter-operability test suite on a
regular (nightly) basis to ensure quality is maintained across all
bindings - even across different releases of bindings.

Regards,
Dan.
-- 
|=-            GPG key: http://www.berrange.com/~dan/gpgkey.txt       -=|
|=-       Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/              -=|
|=-           Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/               -=|
|=-   berrange at redhat.com  -  Daniel Berrange  -  dan at berrange.com    -=|
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dbus/attachments/20060216/3553b3c0/attachment.pgp