[Accessibility] [lsb-discuss] LibToLSB
Wichmann, Mats D
mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Wed May 2 12:18:16 PDT 2007
lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.freestandards.org wrote:
> I have read the LibToLSB documentation. The ABI specification section
> was well written and very informative. It answered most all of my
> Here are a few questions:
> 1) Regarding requirement #4, what is the current required test code
> coverage (eg., 1%, 10%, 50%, 99%)? I would think at least 1% is
> required to setup a template / place holder.
> 2) The conformance test case example demonstrates writing
> TETware-lite instrumented tests; however,
> 2a) requirement for test assertion documentation?
> 2b) test assertion review process?
> 2c) test code review/approval process?
> 2d) test BZR commit process?
> 2e) test build process?
> 2f) test builds per platform?
Although we didn't make a conscious decision on this when
Stew started on the document, your question has highlighted
that the document is mainly on process, and there are
quite a few policy questions that need an answer somewhere.
There's no absolute answer to #1, obviously: we'd like
the best coverage possible, we'd settle for a reasonably
made case that the coverage handles the most important
Nor have we been able - though we'd very much like to -
enforce any rules on 2a, 2b, 2c. When you're dealing
with contributions, it seems like you have to take
what you can get - well, you've been here, you know.
2d - 2f are back to process and we can document those.
More information about the Accessibility