The two tests passed locally for me on Mac, so that vindicates the code you checked-in so you can avoid learning git revert for now.
I’ll try it on Windows tonight. -Alex On 11/3/14, 11:39 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >You are right, I'll revert. I've never done that (still have love-hate >relation with Git), so 'fingers crossed' ;-) > >EdB > > > >On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 11/3/14, 10:55 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >I didn't run these locally, as I didn't expect changes to >> >>SystemManager to >> >> >affect anything but the very core of the SDK. >> >> >> >> I would be surprised if your changes made a difference as well but >>you >> >> never know. I thought the “unofficial” policy was that if your >>checkins >> >> are tied to a run that fails that you have to investigate, by at >> >>minimum, >> >> reverting or showing that the tests pass locally for you. >> >> >> > >> >I "wrote" that policy ;-) But there weren't any tests that consistently >> >failed, the failures have been all over the place. I could revert, but >>my >> >assessment was that not my changes, but something on the VM was the >>root >> >cause. >> >> I’m wondering if there is some easy way to show which tests are failing >> more often than not. My records show that these two tests: >> >> gumbo/components/DataGrid/Properties/DataGrid_Properties_editable >> Editable_twoWayBinding_test Failed AssertMethodValue (method cannot be >> shown)(body:step 13) method returned , expected test1234 >> >> >>gumbo/components/RichEditableText/Properties/RichEditableText_layout_test >>3 >> RichEditableText_Property_maxChars_1 Failed DispatchKeyEvent(body:step >>2) >> Timeout waiting for change from retEditable1 >> >> failed in runs: >> >> >> 1137 >> 1136 >> 1135 >> 1134 >> 1133 >> 1132 >> 1129 >> 1128 >> 1126 >> 1125 >> 1124 >> 1123 >> >> Yes, there were other intermittent failures, and run #1130 was full of >>bad >> stuff. But #1121 passed, then #1123 with your changes, fails, and those >> two tests are the repeat offenders since. I have no idea how they can >>be >> broken by your changes either, but right or wrong, I think you have try >>a >> revert or see if the tests pass locally. >> >> -Alex >> >> > > >-- >Ix Multimedia Software > >Jan Luykenstraat 27 >3521 VB Utrecht > >T. 06-51952295 >I. www.ixsoftware.nl
