Control: severity -1 serious
Hi,
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:20:52 -0500 James McCoy <[email protected]> wrote:
Control: severity -1 important
On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 08:51:45PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > FAILED 2 tests, listed below:
> > FAILED test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua @ 248: LSP basic_init test
should detach buffer in response to nvim_buf_detach
> > test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua:271: exit code
> > Expected objects to be the same.
> > Passed in:
> > (number) 101
> > Expected:
> > (number) 0
> >
> > stack traceback:
> > test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua:271: in function 'on_exit'
> > test/functional/plugin/lsp/helpers.lua:167: in function
'test_rpc_server'
> > test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua:254: in function
<test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua:248>
> >
> > FAILED test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua @ 488: LSP basic_init test workspace/configuration returns NIL per section if client was started without config.settings
> > test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua:505: Expected objects to be the same.
> > Passed in:
> > (userdata) 'vim.NIL'
> > Expected:
> > (table: 0x7fa0a81bbdb8) {
> > [1] = vim.NIL
> > [2] = vim.NIL }
> >
> > stack traceback:
> > test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua:505: in function
<test/functional/plugin/lsp_spec.lua:488>
> >
> >
> > 41 SKIPPED TESTS
> > 2 FAILED TESTS
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [snip]
> If you fail to reproduce this, please provide a build log and diff it with
mine
> so that we can identify if something relevant changed in the meantime.
This looks like typical flakiness that I see in the neovim tests.
Downgrading the severity.
It has failed (in this way) in at least 4 release architectures for the
tree-sitter transition, so I'm raising the severity. If there are flaky tests,
maybe they should be marked as XFAIL, disabled or similar, or ideally be fixed.
Cheers,
Emilio
