Cool, that’s done now :) I think I might need some permissions in JIRA so I can assign tickets to myself (ASF username: rmw42), as I’m only able to watch them and (maybe) comment at the moment...
> On 24 May 2018, at 19:29, Steve Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yep, sounds good. > > Thanks! > - Steve > > On 05/24/2018 02:20 PM, Russ Williams wrote: >> OK. I’ve just been sorting out my GitHub and ASF accounts, I’ll create a >> branch to do that now. >> Should I use 1945 as the bug number for the branch name? >> daffodil-1945-calendar-test-failures? >> >> Cheers, >> — >> Russ >> >>> On 24 May 2018, at 19:13, Steve Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I've created DAFFODIL-1945 [1] to track this. I wouldn't recommend >>> trying to fix it just yet, but if you want to move those tests to >>> src/test/scala-debug and verify that all your tests pass after that >>> change, that would be relatively straight forward first contribution. >>> >>> - Steve >>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DAFFODIL-1945 >>> >>> On 05/24/2018 01:27 PM, Steve Lawrence wrote: >>>> It's up to you, but I can imagine this is going to be a painful place to >>>> debug. We've had plenty of issues with the ICU library in the past and >>>> it's never fun. >>>> >>>> I'd recommend starting with one of the issues previously mentioned, at >>>> least to get your feet wet with Daffoil development. >>>> >>>> I'll create a bug to track the issues you found and we'll move them to >>>> scala-debug until it's sorted out. If you can think of any thing that >>>> might be helpful in reproducing this issue, feel free to email or add it >>>> to the bug. >>>> >>>> - Steve >>>> >>>> >>>> On 05/24/2018 12:12 PM, Russ Williams wrote: >>>>> Cheers! Yeah, I’m not familiar with SBT, so that’ll come in handy. >>>>> >>>>> If it were a thread issue, I’d expect the results to be more random - the >>>>> failures have been 100% consistent, in the same tests, with the same >>>>> values returned. Could just be that I’m lucky. >>>>> >>>>> I’ll also install Eclipse - have used it a lot, but not on my home >>>>> machine - and see if I can debug into the test to see why the results are >>>>> coming out the way they are. >>>>> >>>>> Given that this is (currently) only affecting me, shall I ignore these >>>>> specific tests and go ahead with the branch/bug fixes as discussed >>>>> yesterday? >>>>> >>>>>> On 24 May 2018, at 14:06, Steve Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> That's a good thought. If you're unfamiliar with sbt, to run a single >>>>>> test you can do something like this: >>>>>> >>>>>> $ sbt "testOnly org.apache.daffodil.IBMTestsThatPass -- >>>>>> --tests=test_simple_type_properties_text_calendar_13_01" >>>>>> >>>>>> - Steve >>>>>> >>>>>> On 05/24/2018 08:48 AM, Mike Beckerle wrote: >>>>>>> Russ, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The main thing I hate about the java time libraries (old school Date, >>>>>>> Time, DateTime) is that they are stateful, when run en-masse, our tests >>>>>>> are multi-threaded. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Have you tried running these tests one at a time in isolation? I am >>>>>>> wondering if someplace we are sharing state accidently? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ...mikeb >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>> From: Russ Williams <[email protected]> >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 4:47:52 AM >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>> Subject: Test failures in master >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Testing the build process with a clone of the current master branch, >>>>>>> I’m getting five test failures related to calendar handling for >>>>>>> day-of-week and week-of-year. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One in daffodil-test-ibm1/test: >>>>>>> [error] Test >>>>>>> org.apache.daffodil.IBMTestsThatPass.test_simple_type_properties_text_calendar_13_01 >>>>>>> failed: java.lang.Exception: >>>>>>> [error] Comparison failed. >>>>>>> [error] Expected >>>>>>> [error] >>>>>>> <myDateTime>2010-12-27T04:05:06.000000+00:00</myDateTime> >>>>>>> [error] Actual >>>>>>> [error] >>>>>>> <myDateTime>2010-12-20T04:05:06.000000+00:00</myDateTime> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Four in daffodil-test/test: >>>>>>> [error] Test >>>>>>> org.apache.daffodil.section05.simple_types.TestSimpleTypes.test_dateCalendarDaysInFirstWeek3 >>>>>>> failed: java.lang.Exception: >>>>>>> [error] Comparison failed. >>>>>>> [error] Expected >>>>>>> [error] <date17>2012-01-01+00:00</date17> >>>>>>> [error] Actual >>>>>>> [error] <date17>2012-12-23+00:00</date17> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [error] Test >>>>>>> org.apache.daffodil.section05.simple_types.TestSimpleTypes.test_dateCalendarDaysInFirstWeek5 >>>>>>> failed: java.lang.Exception: >>>>>>> [error] Comparison failed. >>>>>>> [error] Expected >>>>>>> [error] <date20>2013-02-24+00:00</date20> >>>>>>> [error] Actual >>>>>>> [error] <date20>2013-02-10+00:00</date20> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [error] Test >>>>>>> org.apache.daffodil.section05.simple_types.TestSimpleTypes.test_dateCalendarFirstDayOfWeek03 >>>>>>> failed: java.lang.Exception: >>>>>>> [error] Comparison failed. >>>>>>> [error] Expected >>>>>>> [error] <date06>2013-02-03+00:00</date06> >>>>>>> [error] Actual >>>>>>> [error] <date06>2013-02-02+00:00</date06> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [error] Test >>>>>>> org.apache.daffodil.section05.simple_types.TestSimpleTypes.test_dateCalendarFirstDayOfWeek04 >>>>>>> failed: java.lang.Exception: >>>>>>> [error] Comparison failed. >>>>>>> [error] Expected >>>>>>> [error] <date06>2013-02-04+00:00</date06> >>>>>>> [error] Actual >>>>>>> [error] <date06>2013-02-03+00:00</date06> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The dateCalendarDaysInFirstWeek3 failure is particularly bad since it’s >>>>>>> looking for “week 1 of 2012”, which should start on 2012-01-01, but >>>>>>> it’s getting a date in *December* 2012. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Every other test passes cleanly. >>>>>>> I’ve got the same result on my Mac (macOS Sierra/10.12.6, Oracle Java >>>>>>> 1.8.0_51-b16) and a Linux box (Ubuntu 16.04 LTS, Oracle Java >>>>>>> 1.8.0_111-b14). >>>>>>> Setting -Duser.timezone in JAVA_OPTS doesn’t make any difference. >>>>>>> I haven’t been able to test with OpenJDK yet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> — >>>>>>> Russ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
