[tap-l] Mad TAP proposal

[Andy Armstrong]

On 1 Nov 2007, at 00:11, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
>> But what about a more general mechanism? A TAP directive that means
>> 'schedule these other tests'. So then you'd have a controller test
>> which was the only one directly visible to Test::Harness and that'd
>> decide which other tests to run.
>
> It sounds like it would be re-creating a lot of the same functionality
> needed for declarative extra testing and/or Test::Manifest.
>
>  http://scratchcomputing.com/tmp/extra_testing.txt
>
> I would rather it not be a TAP directive.  Yes, it abstracts
> the "manifesting" into TAP, but it still requires some code to run to
> determine the manifest, and will therefore be less introspectable.


Yeah - I slept on it. It should be TSP - Test Steering Protocol. If a  
test emits TAP it's a test, if it emits TSP it's a controller. TAP  
should stay pure.

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Hexten