On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 17:13, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Hi!
Are there any automatic unit test for ConTeXt distribution?
I'm thinking that we might want to set up one on a server. My idea is
as follows:
- set up one complete repository that's regularly updated
- install ConTeXt from there and
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 17:13, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Hi!
Are there any automatic unit test for ConTeXt distribution?
I'm thinking that we might want to set up one on a server.
We already have a server for tests:
http://foundry.supelec.fr/gf/project/contexttest/
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 11:05, Taco Hoekwater wrote wrote:
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 17:13, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Are there any automatic unit test for ConTeXt distribution?
I'm thinking that we might want to set up one on a server.
We already have a server for tests:
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 11:05, Taco Hoekwater wrote wrote:
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 17:13, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Are there any automatic unit test for ConTeXt distribution?
I'm thinking that we might want to set up one on a server.
We already
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 11:05, Taco Hoekwater wrote wrote:
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 17:13, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Are there any automatic unit test for ConTeXt distribution?
I'm thinking that we might want to set up one on a
Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Why? I was talking about fully automatic tests, not tests like compile and
open result in the viewer. I understand that there is not too much
functionality that can be tested automatically (hence, server-side), but at
least some basic things can be tested.
But if
On Sun, Jun 06 2010, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Probably, more features can be tested server-side analyzing the result pdf
file using some library (though I don't know the pdf-parsing libraries
sufficiently good to implement it).
Perhaps it's just sufficient to convert the pdf to an image,
On Sun, Jun 06 2010, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
But if it fails you will most likely end up with a stuck server.
There is --nonstopmode and kill ... ;)
I would do the test in a post-commit hook, that sends email when there is a
problem.
Cheers, Peter
--
Contact information:
Peter Münster wrote:
On Sun, Jun 06 2010, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
Probably, more features can be tested server-side analyzing the result pdf
file using some library (though I don't know the pdf-parsing libraries
sufficiently good to implement it).
Perhaps it's just sufficient to convert
Peter Münster wrote:
On Sun, Jun 06 2010, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
But if it fails you will most likely end up with a stuck server.
There is --nonstopmode and kill ... ;)
I would do the test in a post-commit hook, that sends email when there is a
problem.
Well, I would not object to such a
Hi!
Are there any automatic unit test for ConTeXt distribution? At least the bug
with referenceformat can be catched using something like
context test
pdftotext test.pdf test.txt
diff test.txt test.txt-good
And the bug with broken footnote can be catched using just context test.
If there are
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 17:13, Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
If there are no, any objections against adding them, and testing before
releasing new beta?
No, just go on. Any volunteer with some ideas to start a project is welcome.
Mojca
Hi Yuri and Mojca,
As far as I am concerned, I have a little file named « basic-test.tex »
containing the lines below: eveytime I update the minimals (well… almost
everytime), before doing so, I proceed as follows:
1) I make a backup copy of my existing and working context-minimals
2) I run
yes we have. At next ctx meeting i will show something.(post from mobile sorry)
On 6/5/10, Yury G. Kudryashov ur...@ya.ru wrote:
Hi!
Are there any automatic unit test for ConTeXt distribution? At least the bug
with referenceformat can be catched using something like
context test
pdftotext
14 matches
Mail list logo
