[cosmo-dev] Cosmo Engineering Meeting, Thursday, October 24,
2007 2pm PT
jared at wordzoo.com
Wed Oct 24 16:52:33 PDT 2007
Mikeal Rogers wrote:
> ...the tests as are
> wouldn't have found it [for 11120]...
Is this true for the others on that list as well? How many of these
specifically were coded for being caught by the tests as they were at
the time of the RC? In other words, are we seeing failures of our
existing test code coverage to catch these regressions (bad test,
framework failure, failure to run regression suites), or catching stuff
manually that is outside any tests we have coded?
I agree that 11120 could not have been caught by existing tests at any
More information about the cosmo-dev