Details
-
Improvement
-
Status: Closed
-
Major
-
Resolution: Won't Fix
-
s11
-
None
-
None
Description
review Wiki Errata Implemented/Not Implemented page: https://opensource.ncsa.illinois.edu/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=22052868
synopsis:
Every errata that has a "No" status, and is not about unparsing, we need a JIRA task, and a requirement (or a few perhaps for the larger errata) to track them. Well, I guess we need requirements for all of them - I know Tham did an analysis of this not too far back.
For these errata numbers, I was not sure of the answers. I guessed, but someone from test really needs to see if I am right here. In some cases I may have been optimistic, others pessimistic versus reality.
3.22 - code is there. Do we have test coverage?
3.29 - I vaguely recall discussion of this. Did tests get created?
2.66 - tbd: what is the behavior and do we test this?
2.68 - is this done?
2.103 - do we have tests about alignment of individual instances of an array vs. the whole array?
2.116 - do we check this for defineVariable even?
2.117 - do we have test coverage of this. I recall the design discussions with Taylor, but not sure if this is tested.
2.120 - feels to me like we might have partial coverage of this.
2.121 - done? tested?
2.127 - done? tested?
2.129 - do we check for choice with no branches?
2.134 - done? tested?
comparing to Eratta at http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/dfdl-wg?folder_id=5485