Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: make test runner a script, not a shell function

[Jim Meyering]

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:22:28AM CEST:
>> [Adding bug-grep, dropping bug-coreutils and automake-patches]
>
> re-adding the latter.
>
>> I've noticed that grep uses a definition of TESTS_ENVIRONMENT very similar
>> to that of coreutils (the one we've just fixed), so it will break with
>> oncoming automake too.

It can be simplified there, since none of grep's
tests start with #!/usr/bin/perl.

> That may be a sign that you may not want to actually break this code
> with your proposed changes to Automake.

I suspect that I am the only culprit ;-)
That usage (putting such a shell function in TESTS_ENVIRONMENT)
was admittedly rather twisted.

> Put another way: it's a good idea to estimate the level of breakage
> you're going to burden upon others (a couple of projects, dozens,
> hundreds), the amount of work needed on their side to fix it, and the
> amount of work (or possibility) it would take to change your code so
> they are not broken in the first place.
>
> Also, of course, NEWS entries (and probably automake.texi entries) for
> such changes are a good idea.
>
> One thing I've regularly done with new code that is not 100% backward
> compatible is have a new Automake option for them.  That is exactly why
> there is a 'parallel-tests': it is not fully compatible with the simple
> test driver, and requires work on behalf of developers using Automake.

Your call, but don't do it for me.
For things I maintain it'll be quick and easy to fix.