On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 02:17:30AM +0100, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> If we add it to the documentation the question is if we should also document
> environment variables for builds with make. But maybe that is for a separate
> patch.
>
> As for documenting it in testwrap: that does not feel very useful to me
> since people who know that this is where they should look likely already
> knows about these. It is a pretty hidden place. Hmm, not sure where such
> information belongs.
On point is that this also make the gap in the documentation bigger,
and if we are just doing something, why not tackle it now. It is true
that TESTS is not documented as something that can work in meson, and
that it is not the fault of this patch, but I think that we should
spend a bit of time on the shape of an extra effort for:
1) closing the gap with the existing variables before adding more
stuff.
2) adding documentation for the new things added to testwrap, and
require that documentation is added for everything in the future.
If somebody sends a patch doing 1) for the existing things, and adds
the documentation of the new variables, satisfying 2), I would be OK
to merge the proposal (after checking it of course).
One issue for me with meson is that too many things feel implied, like
the regression test facilities that we make the effort to document for
configure/make.
--
Michael
