Hi Paul -- working on getting stuff cleaned up but you can look at https://github.com/wwb/lucene.net to see what I have been doing. Probably the easiest global trick would be to add [assembly: Timeout(20000)] in the Test project's assemblyinfo.cs file -- it will hard cap every test at 20 seconds which is the happy medium, there are perhaps a half dozen that get clipped by that and part of the cleanup operation was to fix those.
If you are looking for hanging tests look for [Explicit()] attributes -- I used those to mark the hanging tests as I went. In cases where I had narrowed down some causality I tried to note that in the comment in said attribute. Overall one thing I did notice is that there is a pretty big problem with the TestHelper's Random() class that blows up many, many tests. That would be a really good place to start on fixing things as it is used heavily. No, I haven't got the CLA squared away -- where should I start? On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
