Paul, Wyatt's PR is just to skip those tests. If you can get a look at them that'll be way better :)
-- Itamar Syn-Hershko http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko> Freelance Developer & Consultant Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Paul Irwin <[email protected]> wrote: > I just read back through Wyatt's emails and it does seem to be the same > issue in BaseTokenStreamTestCase. Looking forward to your PR, Wyatt. Have > you gotten the CLA squared away yet? > > > Paul Irwin > Lead Software Engineer > feature[23] > > Email: [email protected] > Cell: 863-698-9294 > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Paul Irwin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Working on running the tests now and the > > TestDoubleMockGraphTokenFilterRandom test runs seemingly indefinitely on > my > > machine. It appears like the test completes as the tear-down method > > executes, but I'm sensing that the threads that are spawned in this test > > are running in the background preventing the test from finishing > according > > to the UI (VS Test Explorer with the NUnit adapter). I keep seeing the > same > > repeated test in the output window as well, i.e.: > > > > pass-through: return pending token > >> LTF.nextToken inputPos=15 outputPos=15 tokenPending=False > >> LTF.peekToken inputPos=15 outputPos=15 tokenPending=False > >> LTF.nextToken inputPos=15 outputPos=15 tokenPending=False > >> LTF.peekToken inputPos=15 outputPos=15 tokenPending=False > >> input.incrToken() returned True > >> now inputPos=16 > >> call afterPosition > >> next position: outputPos=16 > >> pass-through: return pending token > >> input.incrToken() returned True > >> now inputPos=16 > >> call afterPosition > >> next position: outputPos=16 > >> pass-through: return pending token > >> LTF.nextToken inputPos=16 outputPos=16 tokenPending=False > >> LTF.peekToken inputPos=16 outputPos=16 tokenPending=False > >> LTF.nextToken inputPos=16 outputPos=16 tokenPending=False > >> LTF.peekToken inputPos=16 outputPos=16 tokenPending=False > >> input.incrToken() returned True > >> now inputPos=17 > >> call afterPosition > > > > > > I'm assuming this is similar to what Wyatt was running into? Anyone else > > seen this or have any ideas? > > > > > > Paul Irwin > > Lead Software Engineer > > feature[23] > > > > Email: [email protected] > > Cell: 863-698-9294 > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Paul, > >> > >> Use the master branch. The branch_4x one is with your work, however the > >> port that was made for master was done from scratch so we are going to > >> discard that branch... > >> > >> For your R&D time, I think your best shot would be at looking at the > >> failing tests in the core and taking it from there. > >> > >> @Wyatt -- any ETA for your PR with marking the faulty tests? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Itamar Syn-Hershko > >> http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko> > >> Freelance Developer & Consultant > >> Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/> > >> > >> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Paul Irwin <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > Awesome, thanks Prescott and Wyatt. I'll get started there. > >> > > >> > Anyone have any insight into why master and branch_4x (where 4.x > porting > >> > work was happening previously) diverged so much? I assume they're > pretty > >> > much unmergeable at this point and branch_4x will be discarded. > >> > > >> > > >> > Paul Irwin > >> > Lead Software Engineer > >> > feature[23] > >> > > >> > Email: [email protected] > >> > Cell: 863-698-9294 > >> > > >> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Prescott Nasser < > >> [email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Master is where we're at for the moment > >> > > ________________________________ > >> > > From: Wyatt Barnett<mailto:[email protected]> > >> > > Sent: 11/25/2014 7:14 AM > >> > > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > >> > > Subject: Re: Branch Status? branch_4x vs master > >> > > > >> > > I think one should be working off the new master branch -- or at > least > >> > that > >> > > is where the CI efforts are going, see > >> > > https://github.com/apache/lucene.net > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Paul Irwin <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hello all, > >> > > > > >> > > > I have some available R&D time so I'd like to jump back in. I'm a > >> > little > >> > > > confused about the status of branch_4x vs master, it looks like > >> they've > >> > > > diverged significantly: > >> > > > > >> > > > "This branch is 462 commits ahead, 131 commits behind master" > >> > > > > >> > > > Can someone fill me in on what's going on here? It looks like I > >> should > >> > > jump > >> > > > in to master, but it appears to not match the commit history of > >> > branch_4x > >> > > > work that happened a while back. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks! > >> > > > > >> > > > Paul Irwin > >> > > > Lead Software Engineer > >> > > > feature[23] > >> > > > > >> > > > Email: [email protected] > >> > > > Cell: 863-698-9294 > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
