[ros-users] using ROS_BUILD_TEST_LABEL with Hudson?

[Brian Gerkey]

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Brian Gerkey <gerkey at willowgarage.com> wrote:
>> To address the problem of unwanted dependencies from testing, we've
>> taken to creating separate test packages (e.g., `test_rospack` has the
>> tests for `rospack`).  That solves things at a package level [*].  But
>> you still need somewhere to put, e.g., the `test_camera1394` package.
>> If it goes in the `camera_drivers` stack, then the stack still has the
>> test-induced dependencies.  This may or may not be acceptable.  If
>> it's not, you could create a separate stack to contain the tests; I
>> don't believe that we've done that yet.
>
> I would not want it in the camera_drivers stack for the same reason it
> should not go in the camera1394 package.

> I don't see anything in ros-pkg/stacks that looks like a collection of
> tests. I am reluctant to add a test_camera stack at that level, but
> don't have a better idea, so suggestions are welcome. Would a
> ros-pkg/stacks/tests subdirectory be awkward?

Just having a tests subdirectory won't be that useful, because we
would need to release that code, to ensure that tests are run, in
prerelease and postrelease builds.  Otherwise, we'd have to add some
special handling to tell Hudson, e.g., also check out the tests
subdirectory and run some tests from in there.

As hesitant as I am to suggest a potential doubling of stacks,
creating a `test_camera_drivers` stack may be the best way to go.
Hopefully this situation (i.e., the tests bring unwanted dependencies
at the stack level) is uncommon; it feels like something that will
happen most often with driver-like things.

	brian.