Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  11 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
David Carr  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Aug 23 2012, 12:44 am
From: David Carr <davidm...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 21:44:38 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Thurs, Aug 23 2012 12:44 am
Subject: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

Is there a particular reason that the test suite is currently using
separate files for test scripts and their expected output?  Personally, I
find the unified ".t" format, where the test script and its expected output
are stored in a single file, to be much easier to read, understand, and
update.  In particular, it's easier to see which command is resulting in
which output without having to inject additional echo statements or
something similar.  We might also be able to eliminate some of the sed
expressions by using the unified test format's support for filtering
outputs with regular expressions.

It looks like it should be easy to upgrade the copy of run-tests.py, and
then possible to convert the existing tests one at a time to the new
format.  If there's interest, I'd be happy to assemble a series of patches
in this direction.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Augie Fackler  
View profile  
 More options Aug 25 2012, 4:38 pm
From: Augie Fackler <r...@durin42.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 15:38:15 -0500
Local: Sat, Aug 25 2012 4:38 pm
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

On Aug 22, 2012, at 11:44 PM, David Carr wrote:

> Is there a particular reason that the test suite is currently using
> separate files for test scripts and their expected output?  Personally, I
> find the unified ".t" format, where the test script and its expected output
> are stored in a single file, to be much easier to read, understand, and
> update.  In particular, it's easier to see which command is resulting in
> which output without having to inject additional echo statements or
> something similar.  We might also be able to eliminate some of the sed
> expressions by using the unified test format's support for filtering
> outputs with regular expressions.

.t files are the modern solution, but the way we perform all-version-tests means that any test that needs to run before .t was introduced in run-tests.py needs to stay non-unified. That might be the right justification to drop older versions of hg.

[backlog = high, still planning to review patches]


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
David M. Carr  
View profile  
 More options Aug 25 2012, 9:18 pm
From: "David M. Carr" <davidm...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 21:18:30 -0400
Local: Sat, Aug 25 2012 9:18 pm
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

I was under the impression that since the copy of run-tests.py that we use
is in our codebase (rather than depending on the one in Hg's codebase), it
wouldn't be affected by how we do all-version-tests. I'll test it to
verify.

--
David M. Carr
davidm...@gmail.com


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Augie Fackler  
View profile  
 More options Aug 25 2012, 9:27 pm
From: Augie Fackler <r...@durin42.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 20:27:20 -0500
Local: Sat, Aug 25 2012 9:27 pm
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

On Aug 25, 2012, at 8:18 PM, David M. Carr wrote:

> I was under the impression that since the copy of run-tests.py that we use
> is in our codebase (rather than depending on the one in Hg's codebase), it
> wouldn't be affected by how we do all-version-tests. I'll test it to
> verify.

That's true for 'make tests', but not 'make tests-${version}' IIRC

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
David M. Carr  
View profile  
 More options Aug 26 2012, 1:05 am
From: "David M. Carr" <davidm...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 01:05:35 -0400
Local: Sun, Aug 26 2012 1:05 am
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

You are indeed correct.  It looks like, of the versions currently
listed in all-version-tests, 1.7.5 is the earliest one that supports
unified tests.

I played around with it a bit, and I think I've got a tweak to the
makefile that allows using our bundled version of run-tests.py with
any version of Mercurial.  It feels slightly inelegant, as it involves
temporarily copying the file into the "crew" working copy, but in
practice I think it's unlikely to cause problems.  If you want to look
at it, it's in my patch queue (links below).

https://bitbucket.org/davidmc24/hg-git-queue/src/bff7c80c2603/alterna...
https://bitbucket.org/davidmc24/hg-git-queue/qseries?apply=t&qs_apply...

--
David M. Carr
davidm...@gmail.com


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Augie Fackler  
View profile  
 More options Aug 28 2012, 10:49 am
From: Augie Fackler <r...@durin42.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:49:41 -0500
Local: Tues, Aug 28 2012 10:49 am
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

On Aug 26, 2012, at 12:05 AM, David M. Carr wrote:

> You are indeed correct.  It looks like, of the versions currently
> listed in all-version-tests, 1.7.5 is the earliest one that supports
> unified tests.

> I played around with it a bit, and I think I've got a tweak to the
> makefile that allows using our bundled version of run-tests.py with
> any version of Mercurial.  It feels slightly inelegant, as it involves
> temporarily copying the file into the "crew" working copy, but in
> practice I think it's unlikely to cause problems.  If you want to look
> at it, it's in my patch queue (links below).

> https://bitbucket.org/davidmc24/hg-git-queue/src/bff7c80c2603/alterna...
> https://bitbucket.org/davidmc24/hg-git-queue/qseries?apply=t&qs_apply...

Cute. I'm not sure it's really worth bothering though, since 1.7.5 is pretty old. Maybe just drop everything before that and unify?

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
David M. Carr  
View profile  
 More options Aug 28 2012, 11:51 am
From: "David M. Carr" <davidm...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 11:51:23 -0400
Local: Tues, Aug 28 2012 11:51 am
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

Works for me.  Once we've worked through the re-work on my currently
submitted patches, I'll move in that direction (removing support for
pre-1.7.5).

--
David M. Carr
davidm...@gmail.com


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
David M. Carr  
View profile  
 More options Sep 6 2012, 5:51 pm
From: "David M. Carr" <davidm...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 17:51:58 -0400
Local: Thurs, Sep 6 2012 5:51 pm
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:51 AM, David M. Carr <davidm...@gmail.com> wrote:

It looks like test-outgoing is currently always skipped.  Should I
leave that one as-is (non-unified), or do something else with it?  I'm
verifying that other tests work as I unify them, but testing that it's
skipped on the first line isn't particularly meaningful.

--
David M. Carr
davidm...@gmail.com


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Augie Fackler  
View profile  
 More options Sep 6 2012, 7:54 pm
From: Augie Fackler <r...@durin42.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 16:54:11 -0700
Local: Thurs, Sep 6 2012 7:54 pm
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

On Sep 6, 2012, at 2:51 PM, David M. Carr wrote:

> It looks like test-outgoing is currently always skipped.  Should I
> leave that one as-is (non-unified), or do something else with it?  I'm
> verifying that other tests work as I unify them, but testing that it's
> skipped on the first line isn't particularly meaningful.

Hm, is it just that we're only supporting versions that don't support outgoing now? If so, let's go ahead and drop the test.

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
David M. Carr  
View profile  
 More options Sep 6 2012, 8:27 pm
From: "David M. Carr" <davidm...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 20:27:46 -0400
Local: Thurs, Sep 6 2012 8:27 pm
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

It looks like you added a comment "This feature is currently
completely broken due to changes in dulwich" back in January along
with an "exit 80" for all versions.  Maybe I'll see if I can figure
out what's needed to get outgoing working again, at which point the
test could be unified.

--
David M. Carr
davidm...@gmail.com


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
David Carr  
View profile  
 More options Sep 8 2012, 1:06 am
From: David Carr <davidm...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 22:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sat, Sep 8 2012 1:06 am
Subject: Re: Test Suite: unified ".t" vs. separated "test/.out/" scripts

> >> It looks like test-outgoing is currently always skipped.  Should I
> >> leave that one as-is (non-unified), or do something else with it?  I'm
> >> verifying that other tests work as I unify them, but testing that it's
> >> skipped on the first line isn't particularly meaningful.

> > Hm, is it just that we're only supporting versions that don't support
> outgoing now? If so, let's go ahead and drop the test.

> It looks like you added a comment "This feature is currently
> completely broken due to changes in dulwich" back in January along
> with an "exit 80" for all versions.  Maybe I'll see if I can figure
> out what's needed to get outgoing working again, at which point the
> test could be unified.

I've got a patch that appears to fix outgoing support ready.  I'll send to
the list along with the other patches I've been working on when the patches
I've already submitted make it into bitbucket.org/durin42/hg-git.

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »