couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nolan Lawson <>
Subject Re: Getting libraries to test RCs
Date Thu, 01 Sep 2016 23:56:42 GMT
We have been testing CouchDB master in PouchDB for months now, but as an allowed failure because
I believe it’s failing for known reasons. We test both using Node.js and the browser.


For anyone who wants to run the Pouch test suite against CouchDB, it’s just:

git clone
cd pouchdb
npm I
COUCH_HOST=http://localhost:5984 BAIL=0 npm t

BAIL=0 will tell it to run the full test suite and not stop on any failures. That way you
can inspect the failures and see if they’re serious or not.


> On Aug 29, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:
> Anyone on this list who could help with this? The work items are fairly self-explanatory
and not very big individually <3
> Best
> Jan
> --
>> On 10 Aug 2016, at 09:37, Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:
>> Hey everyone,
>> from Joan’s excellent blog post about testing Release Candidates:
>>> To our valued CouchDB application and library developers: please, please run
your software against each of the options below.
>> —
>> I think we can be a little more proactive about this for CouchDB client libraries:
let’s open issues on all the CouchDB-compatible client software we care about to test an
>> Since there are a lot of projects, and we don’t necessarily know which one we “care”
about, we should try to be clever about it.
>> Maybe something like this can work:
>> 1. We prepare an issue text explaining the thing: Heya, CouchDB team here, major
new version coming up, you should test it like so: <include instructions to test against
a 3-node cluster. Maybe even provide a cluster to do this, or Cloudant can sponsor something?
>> 2. Post this message with a call to action on user@c.a.o, the weekly news, and our
other (social) media channels.
>> 3. Ask people who submitted an issue to report back with a link.
>> 4. Collect the link in an issue or JIRA (this could be done in 3., but then everybody
needs to be added to the wiki write group, and that’s just extra overhead we don’t need).
Maybe we borrow a gist for this, or a Google doc.
>> That way we encourage client software to check out RCs and we can keep track, while
the community helps to select which software to encourage to test 2.0 compat, and helps spread
the word and the burden is not left with just a few folks.
>> What do you think?
>> Best
>> Jan
>> --
> -- 
> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB:

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