3 ms·
I don't follow this logic. OK, so you removed tests "that haven't failed in years". Then, in a while, you decide to refactor code that those tests were covering
by jimbobimbo 10y ago
I don't follow this logic. OK, so you removed tests "that haven't failed in years". Then, in a while, you decide to refactor code that those tests were covering == foot, meet shotgun.
- taeric 10y agoI did not mean literally "hasn't failed in years? deleted." Instead, lean on the judgement of the people working the system. If it hasn't failed in years, it should be audited to see if it can fail. And if not, removed/revised. Obviously at the discretion of the entire team. (This would be a code reviewed change, after all.)