Re: ACATS legal status cleared by FSF

[Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 12:21:02PM -0500, Geert Bosch wrote:
[...]

Most of these plans seem fine by me except...

> >The B tests require a lot of maintainance (hundreds of pages of
> >changes each time you improve a message, split of files with too many
> >errors, etc...), and have no value for the backend, may be someone
> >will volunteer the packaging, but not me. I assume ACT dedicates
> >someone to this task anyway :).
> Yes, agreed. These tests just represent a lot of maintenance work for
> very little benefit, since these are only tests of programs with errors
> and indeed ACT already does this work.

I disagree in the strongest possible terms.  Put the B tests in the
public repository.  If you don't, you only make life harder for people
outside of ACT who wish to work on the Ada front end.

The maintenance work has to be done anyway, and ought to be the
responsibility of the person who makes the change that causes the
tests to regress.  If the B tests are run as part of "make check" in
the FSF tree, this will be enforced automatically.

zw