couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Bisbee <...@sbisbee.com>
Subject Re: futon tests (Was: Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.1.1 Release)
Date Wed, 19 Oct 2011 23:10:55 GMT
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Sam Bisbee <sam@sbisbee.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 21:25 , Sam Bisbee wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, it looks like it's just an unstable test. Which makes me wonder
>>>> why we even have it or include it in the release process.
>>>
>>> It is only unstable in certain environments and we are constantly improving all
tests to be more stable in all environments, but the browser world is harsh :)
>>
>> I'm all for improvement. :) But is this improvement being tracked
>> anywhere, JIRA or otherwise? And if not, then could it be? I'm sure
>> that folks (self included) would be willing to pitch in if we knew
>> what had to be done.
>>
>
> There was a thread about splitting Futon tests out and making them
> proper CLI tests that are run as part of `make check` and become
> actual release blockers. I have often and loudly voiced my support of
> this approach. I refer you to the number of varying reports for 1.1.1
> with various browsers as Exhibit A in favor of this switch.

Yeah, that sounds like the thread I was remembering.

For what it's worth, a CLI based test system is what I was imagining
as well. Take Futon out of the mix and test CouchDB.

>>> I'd still consider having the test better than not having it at all :)
>>
>> I semi remember this being discussed before, but are the Futon tests
>> meant to test CouchDB, Futon, or the integration of the two?
>>
>
> The test suite is there to test CouchDB. There's some merit to testing
> Futon/Browser access as well. Jan's recent approach to the "verify
> installation" seems to me like a good way forward. We could use a
> small number of tests that check various browser capabilities and what
> not. But I think a large amount of the Futon test code should be
> permanently removed from the browser based test runner.

I think that there is merit in unit testing futon.js and
jquery.couch.js, which just makes those things sound more like their
own project. As a side, semi related note I have always wondered why
jquery.couch.js was part of Apache CouchDB.

For browser/Futon checks, it seems to me that these are more of
environmental checks: is the right version of jquery being used, is it
a supported browser, etc.

Verifying the installation is running `make check`, turning on the
server (which should be checking more permissions), and then running
your software.

Cheers,

--
Sam Bisbee

Mime
View raw message