Talk:Test suite

examples of the test sutes.

External links - Examples of test suites

{{3O}}

Only one example is given, which is a bit biased. There were two more examples, but they have been removed on July 18, 2011

• The ACE supertest suite, an industry leading C/C++ compiler test suite.
• Modena Software, a leading compiler validation testing company which provides test suites for C++ and Java compiler.

This was not spam IMHO. Vasywriter (talk) 06:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

They appear to have violated WP:SPAMLINK: "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam." We're not here to sell products but to be an encyclopedia. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I disagree with this interpretation:

• Such large test suites are useful but are not developed in academia. This is not research. So, they must be commercial
• There is already a similar "spamlink" on this page : "The Plum Hall Validation Suite for C/C++ and the C++ Library, a popular executable Test Suite." So, either one erases all links, or one keeps them all. But selective erasure is a bias towards certain companies against others.
• Wikipedia already provides references to commercial software and this is most useful information. See List_of_tools_for_static_code_analysis for an example. Who would like to erase all links to commercial tools?

Vasywriter (talk) 07:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Books are not products in the same way so you may want to read WP:EL to clarify external lists. As for the list, you should discuss that there, not here, but you may want to read WP:LIST before you do since so far, all you've been doing is inserting your opinion and not applying policy or guidelines. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I do not see the point with mentioning books here: is it essential and am I missing something? My opinion is that, by reverting twice (on July 18, 2011 and then February 2, 2012) the contributed external links, you erased valuable technical information that perfectly fitted with the topic of this page. Moreover, after doing this, Wikipedia was left into an incorrect state according to rule #20 of Wikipedia:EL#Links normally to be avoided. To sort this issue, can we reach consensus on restoring these two external links? Thanks in advance. Vasywriter (talk) 11:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the confusion. I misread the link as Prentice-Hall. The remaining link is also a SPAMLINK. Removing. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I still consider it was a bad decision to remove all examples of test suites from this page. Moreover, besides the repeated assertion that these links were SPAMLINKs, I have seen no detailed justification.

• The Plum Hall Validation Suite for C/C++ and the C++ Library, a popular executable Test Suite
• The ACE supertest suite, an industry leading C/C++ compiler test suite.
• Modena Software, a leading compiler validation testing company which provides test suites for C++ and Java compiler.

I am therefore asking for a third opinion on this matter. Vasywriter (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I think it's important to keep in mind that this article is not really about compiler test suites, it's about test suites in general as a topic in software development. Therefore none of these links is directly relevant. The commercial nature of the links is another strike against them. Considering the encyclopedic value to the reader is very low, I don't think any of them should be included.Gigs (talk) 17:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for your answer. Vasywriter (talk) 09:41, 1 September 2012 (UTC)