couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Will Holley <willhol...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Getting libraries to test RCs
Date Fri, 02 Sep 2016 09:32:35 GMT
Thanks Joan,

I think PouchDB can work around both issues if the decision is that
they represent expected behaviour in 2.0 - that's a call we need the
CouchDB dev team to make though.

On 2 September 2016 at 10:15, Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Will,
>
> Neither of these are currently tagged as blocking issues for CouchDB
> 2.0, only major priority. If you want to flag them as such, this is
> your last chance, and even still, there's no guarantee fixes for them
> will hit 2.0.
>
> Erlangers, is there any chance of at least triaging these today?
>
> -Joan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Will Holley" <willholley@gmail.com>
>> To: dev@couchdb.apache.org, "Joan Touzet" <wohali@apache.org>
>> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 4:43:48 AM
>> Subject: Re: Getting libraries to test RCs
>>
>> Assuming nothing's changed in the last few weeks, there are 2 issues
>> which cause the PouchDB tests to fail against master: COUCHDB-3017
>> and
>> COUCHDB-3034.
>>
>> Both could be addressed in the test suite by using different database
>> names for each test, but that's quite a disruptive change.
>>
>> On 2 September 2016 at 03:15, Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Hi Nolan, you state that it's 'failing for known reasons.' Is that
>> > reasons in PouchDB or anything you need to push back on us? We'd
>> > like
>> > to know ASAP as we're very, very close to releasing 2.0 now.
>> >
>> > I have zero PouchDB knowledge so I'm hoping you can give us a short
>> > summary of what you think is wrong.
>> >
>> > All the best,
>> > Joan
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Nolan Lawson" <nolan@nolanlawson.com>
>> >> To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
>> >> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 7:56:42 PM
>> >> Subject: Re: Getting libraries to test RCs
>> >>
>> >> 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.
>> >>
>> >> Node: https://travis-ci.org/pouchdb/pouchdb/jobs/156198210
>> >> Browser: https://travis-ci.org/pouchdb/pouchdb/jobs/156198211
>> >>
>> >> For anyone who wants to run the Pouch test suite against CouchDB,
>> >> it’s just:
>> >>
>> >> git clone https://github.com/pouchdb/pouchdb.git
>> >> 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.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Nolan
>> >>
>> >> > On Aug 29, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org>
>> >> > 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 <jan@apache.org> 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.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> — https://blog.couchdb.org/2016/08/08/release-candidates/
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 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 RC.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 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:
>> >> > https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>

Mime
View raw message