geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Running integration tests by default?
Date Sat, 05 Jan 2008 22:45:42 GMT

On Jan 5, 2008, at 11:34 AM, Donald Woods wrote:

> Taking another hour to run the IT tests on Tomcat and Jetty (on top  
> of the 30 mins. to run a full build) is just too much wasted time  
> in my busy schedule... :-)  Besides, we have Prasad's scheduled  
> builds running with IT on several times a day, which is close  
> enough to continuous builds to catch build breaks.
>
> I'd rather see more automated builds with every build running the  
> IT instead of forcing it as the default on all our developers.  If  
> someone is working on an isolated piece of code (like Console  
> portlets or non-core plugin like remote mgmt or clustering) then I  
> don't see how always running IT would outweigh the decreased  
> productivity of increased build times...

I don't think I understand your point of view yet.  IIUC we are  
discussing whether we want

A. mvn clean install runs the integration tests, and if you don't  
want to wait for them you can type ctrl-c at any point or run mvn  
clean install -P no-it

B. mvn clean install does not run the integration tests and if you do  
want them you type mvn clean install -P with-it

Obviously its not a lot of fun to wait around while the it tests run  
and I don't expect everyone to run them before most commits.  To me  
however its a good principle to run all the available tests before  
committing ( #1 below) so we should express that principle by making  
that happen in the default build ( # 2 below).  If in your judgement  
your changes are not likely to affect the integration tests you are  
free to not run them (#3 below), or indeed to not do a complete build  
of the server: I for one frequently don't do a full server build  
after changes I think are minor.  (Sometimes this results in me  
staying up very late trying to fix the build after I later discover I  
broke it)

I understand you don't want to run the integration tests before every  
commit, and I don't either and don't expect to.  I'm thinking more of  
the case when I've worked until 3 AM and think I have everything  
working so I do a full build overnight as a last check before  
committing in the morning..... no way will I remember to type -P with- 
it but in this situation there's plenty of time to run all the  
integration tests and a big advantage to doing so.  If you are  
sitting around waiting for a build to complete and you forgot to type  
-P no-it you can still interrupt the build anytime you want -- after  
your module builds, after one assembly completes so you can try  
starting it, after some itests finish.... whenever you want.


>
> Also, there have been 4 console tests broken for well over a week  
> now, with no apparent rush to fix them, so everyone is now used to  
> ignoring the Build Failure notices....
>

I don't think you've been following closely, or my mail isn't  
working.  For quite a while there was an incompatible xbean version  
problem with openejb which Jarek identified and fixed on Jan 2.  We  
then had 8 successful 2.1 builds from Jan 2 to yesterday.  We've had  
3 failed builds since, one possibly anomolous in geronimo-system, and  
2 with the broken console tests you mention.  I ran the itests before  
my last commit and these console tests passed, and I am not a console  
expert, so I haven't looked into them yet.

However, whatever the specific facts about the current failures, I  
think we generally don't pay enough attention to itest failures.   
Personally running them myself a couple times a week is the best way  
I've thought of to keep them on my personal radar.  Do you have any  
ideas how to generally raise the level of attention paid to them?

thanks
david jencks

>
>
> -Donald
>
> David Jencks wrote:
>> On Jan 4, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
>>> How about not running the integration tests by default and  
>>> letting those who want them either 1) use a "-P testsuite" option  
>>> from trunk or 2) run mvn inside the testsuite subdir?
>> (2) is what we had before my change and didn't work for me -- I  
>> never ran the testsuite.
>> My thinking on my change is:
>> 1. Its better to run more tests.  For instance if you see a IT  
>> failure on your machine I think you are much more likely to fix it  
>> than if you have to wait for the notification from Prasad's  
>> automation.  I think this is why we have unit tests as well :-)
>> 2. People are lazy and don't like to type, so the default option  
>> should include the maximum level of testing.
>> 3. In the case of the testsuite, these are run after the rest of  
>> the build is complete, so you are free to interrupt the build if  
>> you get too bored/impatient.
>> Could you explain why you disagree with this or what factors you  
>> consider more important?
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>>
>>> -Donald
>>>
>>>
>>> David Jencks wrote:
>>>> On Jan 2, 2008, at 7:58 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 31, 2007 4:41 PM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> First of all I appear to have broken the build last night with  
>>>>>> some
>>>>>> changes to get the roller plugin building again.  I think I've
>>>>>> managed to fix all the problems -- the it tests all pass for  
>>>>>> me.  Let
>>>>>> me know if there are still problems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think its still too hard to run the integration tests.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to know what exactly you think is hard about it.  
>>>>> It would
>>>>> be great if you could please share your thoughts and ideas on  
>>>>> making
>>>>> it simpler.
>>>> I didn't see a way to run the integration tests with the main  
>>>> build without a separate command.  Unless I can run everything  
>>>> in one command, I'm pretty sure laziness will take over and I  
>>>> won't run the integration tests.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I've made a
>>>>>> possibly annoying change so that the default build includes  
>>>>>> IT.  If
>>>>>> you don't want them run
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mvn clean install -P no-it
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If this is too annoying we could reverse the profiles and have  
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> default leave out the it as before and a with-it profile that
>>>>>> includes them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah. I think the default profile should not run the IT. IMHO,  
>>>>> I think
>>>>> it should not even run the unit tests by default. Developers  
>>>>> (should)
>>>>> run unit & IT tests before committing their code. And we have
>>>>> automation builds with all tests that run 4 times a day  
>>>>> anyways. So
>>>>> the default profile can well do away with tests. But that may  
>>>>> just be
>>>>> my opinion.
>>>> After working through some hard problem and getting ready to  
>>>> commit the last thing anyone wants to do is remember a second  
>>>> command or even a command line option to run some tests: they  
>>>> are apt to type the simplest command that will check the build.   
>>>> I think that command should run all the tests, including the  
>>>> integration tests.  Even though there's enough time to go eat  
>>>> dinner while they run, our most comprehensive checks will be  
>>>> run.  If you get too bored you can always stop the build after  
>>>> you think enough stuff has been checked, and if you remember you  
>>>> can run the build with options to turn off whatever tests you  
>>>> want to skip.
>>>> ApacheDS had their integration tests run using an option and  
>>>> most people did not run them due to the extra effort of trying  
>>>> to remember to type more on the command line.  I think they've  
>>>> changed so the integration tests are run by default.
>>>> I'm happy to keep talking about this.... and I'll be happy  
>>>> enough with a "with-it" option, but I think running everything  
>>>> by default is the best strategy.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comments?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This might have bad effects on Prasad's automation but I'm not  
>>>>>> sure
>>>>>> how that is run.
>>>>>
>>>>> For now, the automation builds have been modified to use the no- 
>>>>> it profile.
>>>>>
>>>> thanks!
>>>> david jencks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks && Happy New Year!
>>>>>> david jencks
>>>>>
>>>>> Happy New Year to ya'll !
>>>>> Prasad


Mime
View raw message