-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CI should require presence of test/runtest.jl for new packages #313
Comments
Makes sense to me |
It seems unnecessary to add friction to registering a package that can just be circumvented with a |
The friction is only in the case where there are no tests, so if we want to encourage tests, that seems like a good place to add friction, no? Sure, it can be easily circumvented, but it’s at least a nudge in the right direction. I think it would also help set the expectation that tests are needed, eg a new developer might not know they’re something they should have, and learn about it from an automerge failure. In general I think it’s fine for automerge to be opinionated in order to try to help nudge the package ecosystem in a good direction (since RegistryCI’s biggest client, the General registry, is a shared resource we want to keep healthy, not just an easy way to access random pieces of code). |
With the technology of ~~~tokei~~~ (https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/tokei, packaged as My opinion is that we probably should not do this (at least at this point), and just start with checking that |
A much weaker version of #120
and similar to #261 (though less crucial)
Even if we are not going to run it, or check that it contains something meaningful,
I think it is worth checking the bare minimum effort has been put into making sure the package is good.
At least be aware enough of what is going on to know that packages have these.
We used to have this requirement at one point for registring packages back in 0.4 days.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: