cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [mobile-spec] consistency and reliability
Date Fri, 31 Oct 2014 18:23:59 GMT
Brian - I looked into tap and someone has wrote a Jasmine tap reporter (so
we can just plug this in) -- but the usage problems that Michal wrote about
won't just fix themselves I don't think if we use the tap reporter so there
is still work to be done just getting it to work reliably.

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:

> Nope.
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 5:04 PM Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would much rather we fix things, than continually rewrite + discard,
> > which seems to be the norm these days.
> > tape/tap would require us to throw away thousands of jasmine2 based tests
> > wouldn't it?
> >
> >
> > @purplecabbage
> > risingj.com
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
> >
> > > tape (and or tap) has no globals and simple / shallow callback solution
> > > which fixes that
> > >
> > > we will have fresh intern blood to sacrifice to the test lib gods alter
> > > soon..
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:10 PM Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've seen that in the past and it usually happens due to misuse of
> > > jasmine,
> > > > which seems unfortunately quite brittle.  Specifically, if done()
> isn't
> > > > called, or an async event fires after a test has already failed /
> timed
> > > out
> > > > and calls done(), or registers new tests with it() etc, weird things
> > will
> > > > happen.
> > > >
> > > > Usually its a sign that a test is not handling failures
> appropriately,
> > > but
> > > > it is a bit unfortunate that jasmine is so brittle.
> > > >
> > > > -Michal
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Toda, Shingo <
> > > ShingoT@fast.au.fujitsu.com
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is exactly what I got too.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Shingo
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Shazron [mailto:shazron@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 9:02 AM
> > > > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> > > > > Cc: Toda, Shingo
> > > > > Subject: Re: [mobile-spec] consistency and reliability
> > > > >
> > > > > Seems to be exactly what I am seeing.
> > > > > Here's the image as a link: http://i.imgur.com/n6ST1Kd.png?1
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Toda, Shingo <
> > > > ShingoT@fast.au.fujitsu.com
> > > > > <mailto:ShingoT@fast.au.fujitsu.com>> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Shazron
> > > > >
> > > > > Our team are running mobilespec for Android, iOS and Windows. I
> > cannot
> > > > see
> > > > > the attachment but we also have been seeing what you’ve gotten
> since
> > > new
> > > > > style mobilespec was introduced. It seems that each plugin test run
> > > works
> > > > > fine but if all tests get run at once I am likely to get more than
> > one
> > > > > report in a run reporting that there are a number of specs like 900
> > > specs
> > > > > (I don’t think specs are so much).
> > > > >
> > > > > I noticed that some of the specs were called more than once when
I
> > got
> > > > > multiple reports. I usually disable FileTransfer, Globalization and
> > > Media
> > > > > specs at first then run test for them individually because I saw
> some
> > > of
> > > > > those tests got called more than once. This could be just my case
> so
> > it
> > > > > might not be yours.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Shingo
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Shazron [mailto:shazron@gmail.com<mailto:shazron@gmail.com>]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 7:54 AM
> > > > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org<mailto:dev@cordova.apache.org>
> > > > > Subject: [mobile-spec] consistency and reliability
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > `cordova-mobile-spec/createmobilespec/createmobilespec.js --ios
> > > > > --globalplugins`
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone gotten mobile-spec to work consistently? I get wildly
> > > > different
> > > > > results on each run. Sometimes there is more than one report in a
> > run.
> > > > See:
> > > > >
> > > > > [Inline image 1]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message