http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9053 Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |Needs Signoff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9053 Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #13375|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #2 from Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> --- Created attachment 13379 --> http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=13379&action=edit Bug 9053: Test::MockModule and DBD::Mock should be required Test::MockModule and DBD::Mock are required for the unit tests in t/ to run. This is good, but means they should be required. Signed-off-by: Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9053 Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jonathan.druart@biblibre.co | |m --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com> --- QA comment: The patch is correct but I don't understand where stands the boundary between "required" and "not required". What is the idea behind this patch? To me, launching tests is not useful for a fonctionnal use of Koha. If these 2 modules are required perhaps should we add the others Test::* as required, too? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9053 --- Comment #4 from Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com> --- (In reply to comment #3)

QA comment:

The patch is correct but I don't understand where stands the boundary between "required" and "not required". What is the idea behind this patch?

To me, launching tests is not useful for a fonctionnal use of Koha. If these 2 modules are required perhaps should we add the others Test::* as required, too?

These two modules are required for the tests in t/ to pass -- which is reasonable -- and running the tests in t/ is part of the installation process. I don't know that it's necessary to make all Test modules required, though I don't know that there's any reason *not* to make all Test modules required. Installing the Test modules is not a great hardship, and I'd rather new users know if there's a problem with the version of Koha that they're installing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9053 Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Passed QA |Pushed to Master CC| |jcamins@cpbibliography.com --- Comment #6 from Jared Camins-Esakov <jcamins@cpbibliography.com> --- This patch has been pushed to master. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=9053 Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Pushed to Master |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Chris Cormack <chris@bigballofwax.co.nz> --- Released in 3.10.0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.