8000 How far should we go to make up for missing features in other OSS projects? · Issue #3187 · PowerShell/PowerShell · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to content
How far should we go to make up for missing features in other OSS projects? #3187
@JamesWTruher

Description

@JamesWTruher

Especially with regard to Pester as we rely on it as our test infrastructure, but sometimes Pester does not have a feature which we would like. Should we code up our own solution and use it?

I am very concerned about this because it does not help the Pester community and places a burden on anyone who wishes to use our solution to get one more module, or script. Specifically, when checking for error conditions, we would rather validate against FullyQualifiedErrorId rather than the message (which is what Pester provides). I would be happier to have a PR filed on Pester which implements an assertion for something like ThrowFullyQualifiedErrorId (or similar) rather than coding around this in our own code. This allows Pester to have something generally useful and avoid more and more unneeded custom code.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Issue-Discussionthe issue may not have a clear classification yet. The issue may generate an RFC or may be reclassifResolution-AnsweredThe question is answered.WG-Quality-Testissues in a test or in test infrastructure

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions

      0