db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Van Couvering <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Release testing: i18n validation
Date Fri, 26 May 2006 17:40:40 GMT
Well, the way I've done it is to do a sed parsing of files to find 
invocations of "new SqlException".  This is inherently a brittle 
approach because it isn't using the real semantics of Java to figure 
this out.  So if somebody writes something a little different, things 
get munged up.

The real issue where I keep having to fix the script (and yes, mere 
mortals can do it, but one has to wonder if they'll be motivated) is 
that there are variables used in the invocation of the constructor, and 
I have to substitute those variables with generic strings so the test 
will compile.  I have an idea how I might handle this in one swell foop 
with a grand sed incantation, and if I can, this would add some 
significant stability to the test.  I would be willing to try to put 
this into the nightlies if I can accomplish this.

The "right" way to do this would be to write something that is somehow 
an extension of or a plugin to the compiler which can find out using 
real Java semantics where all the invocations are and generate code as a 
result.  That's not my itch to scratch.

David

Rick Hillegas wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> How volatile is this test and how hard to fix it when it breaks? Can 
> mere mortals help out here? Do you think that, with a little more work, 
> it's feasible to drop this into the nightly test run some day? I'm not 
> speculating about who might want to scratch that itch, just wondering 
> how gnarly this is.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Rick
> 
> David Van Couvering wrote:
> 
>> The problem with running it as nightlies is that it is liable to fail 
>> at compile time when new messages are added -- I regularly have to 
>> update the sed script to adjust for these new messages.  I would hate 
>> to have the build fail because of this.
>>
>> If you have any ideas, let me know, but that was the reason I didn't 
>> suggest it for nightlies.
>>
>> David
>>
>> Kathey Marsden wrote:
>>
>>> David Van Couvering wrote:
>>>
>>>> There's a test I'd like to see run as part of release verification.
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> This involves a lot of substitution work, and each time new 
>>>> SqlExceptions are introduced, it tends to require some tweaking
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> I could run this test myself as part of my validation of the 
>>>> release, but it would be great to have this documented as one of the 
>>>> tests to run.
>>>>
>>>> If there are no objections, I can add a link to instructions on how 
>>>> to run it off of the general "how to cut a release" page.
>>>>
>>> It seems like  since this test is sensitive to individual changes and 
>>> it might expose issues that would hold up the release, running it as 
>>> part of making the release might be a bit late.  It would be best if 
>>> we could get folks running nightlies to add this in.   That way it 
>>> doesn't become a fire drill at release time.
>>>
>>> Kathey
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 

Mime
View raw message