Failing tests in #development
it was a bad idea to integrate PR 606 [1] about the world menu tooltips before it was green. Now we have failing tests in the development branch and validations of new pull requests will fail immediately. Btw. I do not think this test should be in the ReleaseTest because these tests should be valid for the minimal image too. [1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/606 -- Pavel
The same for https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/514 :-( 2017-12-18 9:12 GMT+01:00 Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek@gmail.com>:
it was a bad idea to integrate PR 606 [1] about the world menu tooltips before it was green. Now we have failing tests in the development branch and validations of new pull requests will fail immediately.
Btw. I do not think this test should be in the ReleaseTest because these tests should be valid for the minimal image too.
[1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/606
-- Pavel
but this is because we still need to stabilise the CI: what happens now is that we know some tests are failing randomly then we do not trust the CI to tell us everything is ok. Then we accept PRs in red state. Of course, this will fail eventually, and thatâs what we are seeing. Most important thing, IMO is to fix the CI: those tests that fails randomly (I think most of them are networking problems) needs to be fixed or removed. You would say âyou cannot remove a test of Xâ but in fact, a test that fails because of non controllable reasons is a bad test. Then, we need to have a âno red integrationâ policy. This will fix this problems, but of course, we need to work to make this happen ;) Esteban
On 18 Dec 2017, at 09:21, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek@gmail.com> wrote:
The same for https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/514 <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/514>
:-(
2017-12-18 9:12 GMT+01:00 Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek@gmail.com <mailto:pavel.krivanek@gmail.com>>: it was a bad idea to integrate PR 606 [1] about the world menu tooltips before it was green. Now we have failing tests in the development branch and validations of new pull requests will fail immediately.
Btw. I do not think this test should be in the ReleaseTest because these tests should be valid for the minimal image too.
[1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/606 <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/606>
-- Pavel
Le 19 déc. 2017 à 10:50, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> a écrit :
but this is because we still need to stabilise the CI: what happens now is that we know some tests are failing randomly then we do not trust the CI to tell us everything is ok. Then we accept PRs in red state. Of course, this will fail eventually, and thatâs what we are seeing.
Most important thing, IMO is to fix the CI: those tests that fails randomly (I think most of them are networking problems) needs to be fixed or removed.
I think we should not rely on external services for our tests. We should mock every network service call to have a local version (still using the network). Then, you will not have failing tests because of timeout or network problem. With Zinc or Teapot itâs quite easy to set up a network service on a local port of the machine running tests.
Yes sorry I did not think that it could crash. I do not really understand why the tooltip can break only for one tool. On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek@gmail.com> wrote:
it was a bad idea to integrate PR 606 [1] about the world menu tooltips before it was green. Now we have failing tests in the development branch and validations of new pull requests will fail immediately.
Btw. I do not think this test should be in the ReleaseTest because these tests should be valid for the minimal image too.
[1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/606
-- Pavel
On mar. 19 déc. 2017 at 18:27, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes sorry I did not think that it could crash. I do not really understand why the tooltip can break only for one tool.
Hi, With the tooltips I added a test to ensure all tools have an explanation. Currently there is one missing for Iceberg since it will be in its next release.
-- Cyril Ferlicot https://ferlicot.fr
http://www.synectique.eu 2 rue Jacques Prévert 01, 59650 Villeneuve d'ascq France
ahhhhhhhhhhh ok so this is then really nothing. Just blurs any further tests. So in case case we should do two PR on without iceberg and one for iceberg + change the test after... Seems to me a bit over kill. On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 6:37 PM, Cyril Ferlicot <cyril.ferlicot@gmail.com> wrote:
On mar. 19 déc. 2017 at 18:27, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes sorry I did not think that it could crash. I do not really understand why the tooltip can break only for one tool.
Hi,
With the tooltips I added a test to ensure all tools have an explanation. Currently there is one missing for Iceberg since it will be in its next release.
-- Cyril Ferlicot https://ferlicot.fr
http://www.synectique.eu 2 rue Jacques Prévert 01, 59650 Villeneuve d'ascq France
participants (5)
-
Christophe Demarey -
Cyril Ferlicot -
Esteban Lorenzano -
Pavel Krivanek -
Stephane Ducasse