I’m in favor of deleting all except the ones that have JIRA tickets open for them, like Bruce said.
Also going forward I’d like to see us not be checking in @Ignored tests — just delete them instead. If we need to get it back we have revision history. Just my two cents. Aaron > On Dec 31, 2019, at 2:53 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bschucha...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > I agree with deleting @Ignored tests except for the few that have JIRA > tickets open for them. There are less than 1/2 dozen of these and we should > consider keeping them since we have a way of tracking them. > > On 12/31/19 2:07 PM, Alexander Murmann wrote: >> Here are a few things that are true for me or I believe are true in general: >> >> - Our test suite is more flaky than we'd like it to be >> - I don't believe that adding more Unit tests that follow existing >> patterns buys us that much. I'd rather see something similar to what some >> folks are doing with Membership right now where we isolate the code and >> test it more systematically >> - We have other testing gaps: We have benchmarks 👏🎉, but we are still >> lacking coverage in that ares; our community is still lacking HA tests. >> I'd >> rather fill those than bring back old DUnit tests that are chosen somewhat >> at random. >> - I'd rather be deliberate about what tests we introduce than wholesale >> bring back a set of tests, since any of these re-introduced tests has a >> potential to be flaky. Let's make sure our tests carry their weight. >> - If we delete these tests, we can always go back to a SHA from today >> and bring them back at a later date >> - These tests have been ignored since a very long time and we've shipped >> without them and nobody has missed them enough to bring them back. >> >> Given all the above, my vote is for less noise in our code, which means >> deleting all ignored tests. If we want to keep them, I'd love to hear a >> plan of action on how we bring them back. Having a bunch of dead code helps >> nobody. >> >> On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 1:50 PM Mark Hanson <mhan...@pivotal.io> wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> As part of what I am doing to fix flaky tests, I periodically come across >>> tests that are @Ignore’d. I am curious what we would like to do with them >>> generally speaking. We could fix them, which would seem obvious, but we are >>> struggling to fix flaky tests as it is. We could delete them, but those >>> tests were written for a reason (I hope). Or we could leave them. This >>> pollutes searches etc as inactive code requiring upkeep at least. >>> >>> I don’t have an easy answer. Some have suggested deleting them. I tend to >>> lean that direction, but I thought I would consult the community for a >>> broader perspective. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Mark
