incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 27MB odt file in svn
Date Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:51:22 GMT
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

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

Mime
View raw message