lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Busch <>
Subject Re: back compat testing
Date Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:26:57 GMT
+1. I think this makes sense.

To get around the problem of testcases being dependent on 
package-private APIs that change between minor releases, maybe we should 
*only* have testcases in that branch? Otherwise if we have to make a 
change to a test to make it compile with an API we changed in trunk it 
would not compile anymore against the core code in the branch.


Michael McCandless wrote:
> We now run "ant test-tag" in the nightly build, to verify that all
> unit tests in 2.4.0 still pass, which is awesome.
> But, for LUCENE-1464, which is ready to commit, there is a bug in
> TestLockFactory whereby its rmDir method hits an NPE if the directory
> doesn't exist.  For two testcases that now happens because I fixed
> FSDir.getDirectory to not create the dir (until createOutput is called).
> I think the test should be fixed, and my patch has that fix, but in
> order to keep using "ant test-tag", I'd like to make a branch and
> commit the fix for this test onto that branch, and fix "ant test-tag"
> to checkout that branch.
> Any objections?  How about the name 
> "branches/lucene_2_4_back_compat_tests"?
> Going forward if we ever need to "fix" tests, I think we commit
> the fix to that branch at the same time as committing to trunk.
> Mike
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message