test framework is fragile to file permissions changes (+x)

[pcostell]

No description provided.

[dhermes]

See comments on #208 and #86 for context.

[pcostell]

Bringing the conversation here:
In theory watching for drastic coverage changes could have caught this -- it would have dropped from ~65% to 55%.

[dhermes]

That's true. I was writing it off as one less line of code without any new coverage ((A - 1) / (B -1) < A / B) without actually looking at the difference between numbers.

A true solution would be 100% code coverage and having coveralls fail if it ever dropped.

[eamonnmcmanus]

Actually @dhermes when you looked it really was just one less line of code. I added the regression test later at the request of @nathanielmanistaatgoogle and that's when I screwed up the permissions.

[dhermes]

Yeah that's true. I think 100% code coverage makes it fool-proof. Finding a permission change among

is not an easy task

[eamonnmcmanus]

Oh wow, those are octal permission masks. Live and learn.

[dhermes]

Indeed, but no one would even think to look at them during a code review.

[theacodes]

Thank you for creating this issue, however, this project is deprecatedand we will only be addressing critical security issues. You can read moreabout this deprecation here.

If you need support or help using this library, we recommend that you ask yourquestion on StackOverflow.

If you still think this issue is relevant and should be addressed, pleasecomment and let us know!