Look into continuous integration and unit testing

[gbear605]

In 2016 we made minimal use of continuous integration, but it didn't really help. To be more useful in the future, it would need to have more unit tests than the basic ones that I implemented. Those unit tests would require a version of WPILib that doesn't require the presence of the robot. I know that @Team254 has done this in the past, so it might be possible to use their version, or another team's version. If not, we will need to create a version ourselves. I suspect that that difficulty combined with the difficulty of writing unit tests for an environment like FRC will outweigh the benefit of unit tests.

[Ipsum]

I am 100% for testing always but without a decent test harness I would have to vote to make this lower priority. We do need to figure out some way of controlling the quality of code even under pressure though.

[arlevin]

@Ipsum Agreed. It's the 2nd lowest item. @gbear605 please let us know if you disagree

[gbear605]

I agree with it being very low priority.
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 23:02 arlevin notifications@github.com wrote:

@Ipsum https://github.com/Ipsum Agreed. It's the 2nd lowest item.
@gbear605 https://github.com/gbear605 please let us know if you disagree

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#14 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAqKHKjpUrNYZP3srSC20M3FiUmt0KNfks5qr0zAgaJpZM4KBJxm
.