On 03/27/2014 04:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> On 03/27/2014 11:56 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Also, there's the vcregress.pl business. The way it essentially
>>> duplicates pg_upgrade/test.sh is rather messy; and now that
>>> test_decoding also needs similar treatment, it's not looking so good.
>>> Should we consider redoing that stuff in a way that allows both MSVC and
>>> make-based systems to run those tests?
>> Well, to start with people need to get out of the habit of writing tests
>> in shell script.
> What alternative do you propose? We have a policy of not requiring Perl
> to build/test, so don't suggest that.
>
> I'm inclined to think the problem with test.sh is not so much the language
> that it's in, as that it's single-purpose. Maybe it has to be given the
> nature of the pg_upgrade tests, but we should look for some generality.
> I'd be happy if we had shell-based infrastructure on non-Windows and a
> separate Perl equivalent for Windows, as long as we didn't have to start
> from scratch for each special-configuration test scenario.
>
>
If you can create it so it's somehow config driven, we can surely
replicate the engine in Perl. But I'm not going to hold my breath waiting.
cheers
andrew
