Code review comment for lp:~vanvugt/compiz/XDamageReport2
Revision history for this message
| Sam Spilsbury (smspillaz) wrote | # |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
35a32c5
(Get the code!)
The reason i say unit tests is because the code itself is tightly coupled and looks easy to subtly break if someone doesnt know what they are doing.
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Daniel van Vugt <email address hidden> wrote:
The risk, and what needs testing here, is for races between XFunctions and the X server. Testing for such races should be done as part of a system test suite that runs a real compiz instance on a real X server. Unit tests in this case are not relevant.
The next best thing to an automated system test suite, until one exists, is manual testing.
--
https:/
You are reviewing the proposed merge of lp:~vanvugt/compiz/XDamageReport2 into lp:compiz.