harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From George Harley <george.c.har...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r419522 - in /incubator/harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/nio: .classpath build.xml make/hyproperties.xml src/test/java/common/ src/test/java/common/org/ src/test/java/linux/ src/test/java/org/ src/test/java/windows/
Date Thu, 06 Jul 2006 21:22:08 GMT
Mark Hindess wrote:
> On 6 July 2006 at 18:05, George Harley <george.c.harley@googlemail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>     
>>> On 6 July 2006 at 12:55, George Harley <george.c.harley@googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>
>>>> From what I can tell this JIRA hasn't really achieved much apart
>>>> from pushing code around the repository and breaking at least one
>>>> patch (HARMONY-755).
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Well, obviously that wasn't my motivation! ;-)
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> No one was saying it was. BTW, good to hear you have some motivation :-)
>>
>>
>>     
>>> >From the description, it was clear (to me anyway) that the patch was to
>>> enable the use of platform-specific test code.  While the directories
>>> for the platform-specific test code are currently empty, I'm certain
>>> Paulex plans to rectify this pretty soon.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Creating empty directories is not the issue here. The patch also 
>> entailed moving a whole bunch of other files around the source tree for 
>> reasons that are  currently being discussed in the dev list.
>>
>>     
>>> I think Paulex was correct to separate the process of allowing for
>>> platform-specific tests (HARMONY-782) from any JIRA containing new
>>> tests.
>>>   
>>>       
>> The "process" of allowing for new platform-specific tests is precisely 
>> what is being currently discussed on the dev-list in the referenced thread.
>>     
>
> I thought it was categorisation of tests in general.
>
>   

Hi Mark,

Since "platform-specific" is one important category of test then 
discussion and agreement on the general topic is important.


>>> The JIRA comment by Paulex mentioned that it would break two existing
>>> JIRA issues - HARMONY-775 and HARMONY-767.  I applied the former but the
>>> latter was already assigned to Tim and marked 'In Progress' so I didn't
>>> feel it was right to steal it.  However I have made the trivial change
>>> to the patch metadata to fix the HARMONY-767 patch.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately it didn't mention the HARMONY-775 patch, otherwise I might
>>> have checked with you first.
>>>       
>> It was HARMONY-755. I know, now I'm just being picky :-)
>>     
>
> Yes. :-)
>
>   
>>>> It would be great if you or Paulex (and everyone in fact) could
>>>> comment in the "[classlib] Testing conventions - a proposal" thread
>>>> [1] about this.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Certainly - though this seems to me to be orthogonal to the purpose of
>>> the HARMONY-782 patch.
>>>       
>> The summary of HARMONY-782 is "Relayout NIO test cases to platform 
>> dependent". That is orthogonal to the dev-list discussion on proposed 
>> test layout ??? Are you serious ??????
>>     
>
> Ok so maybe not orthogonal but the JIRA (regardless of the exact title)
> was an enabler to allow additional platform-specific tests to be added.
> And adding new tests is something that is independent of the need to
> restructure.  Or are you saying we shouldn't create any more tests (or
> fix existing tests) until the restructuring issue is decided?
>
>   

If adding new platform-specific tests is "independent of the need to 
restructure" then why did you restructure the NIO tests ?


No, I am not saying that we shouldn't create any more tests. No, I am 
not saying that we should stop fixing existing ones. This is not a 
restructuring issue. If anything, this is an anti-restructuring issue. 
This is about pausing to consider a different approach to the existing 
proposal for how we manage our tests. It deserves to be considered as it 
has the potential to save us all a lot of time and effort pushing files 
around.

> While I see the importance of the restructuring I'm also keen not to
> prevent the problematic nio tests to be fixed.
>
>   

Ditto. But what is the urgency here ? 

> Are you suggesting that applying the JIRA made the state of the tests
> any worse than it was before?  (I even made an effort to ensure that the
> change was made in a way that was more consistent with the current state
> of another module - to make it easier to programmatically fix them later
> when the test structure issue is resolved.)
>
> Regards,
>  Mark.
>
>   

IMHO this is not really about just HARMONY 782 and I would be genuinely 
upset if the impression was that I was getting at you or Paulex because 
it's not true. This is about asking you, Paulex and everyone to think 
about what our tests structure is going to look like eventually, how 
much effort is going to be required to maintain its labyrinth layout, 
the amount of overhead that is going to mean for our infrastructure (Ant 
scripts, IDE metadata files etc) and whether or not we can do better.


Best regards,
George

>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>   


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message