In D60836#1395163, @fuz wrote:

In D60836#1395161, @diizzy wrote:

Well,

In D60836#1395155, @fuz wrote:

You don't really need to patch the test suite to exit with failure if it does not pass, as the make test target is mainly for human operators to look at.
That said, it's your choice and it's ok to do it if you prefer that.
No PORTREVISION bump needed.

Uhm,.. No, https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/Mk/Features/testing.mk

Yeah nobody uses that as only about half the test suites actually pass. Good luck with that.

In D60836#1395155, @fuz wrote:

You don't really need to patch the test suite to exit with failure if it does not pass, as the make test target is mainly for human operators to look at.
That said, it's your choice and it's ok to do it if you prefer that.
No PORTREVISION bump needed.

Given that you actually do a "make test" for each update accordingly you hardly need to read the whole log as your claim and it's pointless if its stale in which you need to read the log anyway to figure out when its from anyway.
There's no need at all to clutter the Makefile, you have commit messages for documentation and git log Makefile is hardly a much of an effort.

Just mentioned it in the commit message, there's no need to clutter the Makefile with that information (which also tends to go stable because people forget)...

Can we please try to add unit test when possible to at least attempt to ensure that basic functionality works as intended?