incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 27MB odt file in svn
Date Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:24:49 GMT


On 08/29/2012 10:51 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Andre Fischer <awf.aoo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 29.08.2012 16:02, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Andre Fischer <awf.aoo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I just saw that we have now two new binary files in the test/ module.
>>>>
>>>> main/test/testgui/data/svt/complex.ods has a size of 9 424 385 Bytes and
>>>> main/test/testgui/data/svt/complex.odt has a size of 27 175 936 Bytes.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if SVN is really the best place for files that large.
>>>>
>>>> I also don't think that these files should be part of the source release.
>>>> But what else would have to be removed that depends on these files?
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Something to keep in mind is that we'll probably end up with a large
>>> number of test documents, 200+ MB.  Not all of them will be large.
>>> But if we want to have good test coverage then we'll need test
>>> documents to cover all areas, for ODF, MS Binaries and OOXML.  So this
>>> will grow, over time, to a large test set.
>>>
>>> This leads to four questions:
>>>
>>> 1) Should we be testing large/complex documents?
>>>
>>> I think the answer is "yes".
>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 2) Should such test documents be in SVN?
>>>
>>> I think they should.
>>
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 3) Should these documents be in the same source tree with the rest of
>>> the code that is downloaded by default for a build?
>>>
>>> Maybe not.  Unless they are needed for a smoke test that should be run
>>> by every developer.  But if not, maybe they should be stored in its
>>> own tree, like ooo/test/trunk or something like that.
>>>
>>> 4) Should these documents be included in the source distribution?
>>>
>>> Probably depends on the answer to question 3.  Maybe, maybe not.  Or
>>> maybe we have a separate source distribution artifact only for
>>> test-related files?
>>
>>
>>
>> My personal opinion is no.  I believe that the use case for downloading and
>> building the source release is different from the use case for cloning the
>> SVN repository.  I would expect the source release to be used for building
>> AOO, maybe do a simple test to verify that building was successful, and then
>> delete the source code.
>>
>
> OK.  That is a useful distinction:  building versus developing.
>
>> If I want to start developing then I would choose SVN.  Complex tests would
>> help me to avoid new errors.
>>
>> I don't see the need for complex tests when my goal is not developing. Lack
>> of trust that we did not run the tests on the released code?
>>
>> But, of course I can be wrong (and often are :-).
>>
>
> If we follow that logic, then we might still store the test data and
> test code in SVN, but in its own tree, e.g., /ooo/test/trunk.
>
> This also preserves the option of us having a "test source" artifact
> in a future release, if we wanted.
>
> -Rob

+1, this seems like a good compromise

I don' think the "test" cases should be in the same tree as source.

No use overloading developers who simply want to build and make 
modifications.


>
>> -Andre
>>
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Andre
>>
>>

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"As a child my family's menu consisted of two choices:
     take it or leave it. "
                                    -- Buddy Hackett

Mime
View raw message