2013/5/23 Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com>
On 2013-05-22, at 22:11, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
2013/5/22 Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com>
On 2013-05-22, at 21:04, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
On May 22, 2013, at 5:33 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 22 May 2013 10:38, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
I would use
TextModelCore TextModelExtensions
TextModelCore-Tests
No extra dash in the middle.
nooooo :)
But for tests, i +1, the names are not very good. For package:
Package-Name-Tick-Tack
tests should be in:
Package-Name-Tick-Tack-Tests
This convention used everywhere in pharo.
Please do not do that :).
If you do that, publishing Package-Name-Tick-Tack will publish the code from Package-Name-Tick-Tack-Tests, too :). Why? Because we have a lovely implicit one-to-many mapping.
So, the pattern I know of is to put the Tests as a discriminator before the variable part of your code. So, something like: - BaseName-Core - BaseName-Tests-Core
But, the rule I apply more recently for code is to use - only for categories, and camel case for the Monticello packages. Like this we
also
document what is the unit of publishing, thus when you look into the code browser we also know what is mapped on a Monticello package.
I would love to change that rule. I think Tests have the same value as the code itself. The only reason to not load the code is the load time for the configuration. Which is basically is unimportant if you have a CI server preparing images for you.
I can only speak for smaller projects, but I really do not sea a reason to not load tests...
Because tests not needed to run your application.
technically yes, but you do not need many things to run the code: - class comments - method comments - any documentation in general
And I don't have it at production because I don't have changes file here.
yet you load them. so I wonder if it makes sense to even load tests separately?
It make sense when you try to reduce production image size. And loading only required packages (without tests) works well. Why change it?