It fails for TinkerGraph when I add the asserts. It doesn't fail on the tests you specified though. Fails on GroupTestV3d0 - and not GroupTest (the old group() function). Is that what you meant to type in TINKERPOP3-948?
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:43 PM, pieter <[email protected]> wrote: > Ah sorry posted the wrong link, I mean this issue > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-949 > I found the assert bug while investigating failing repeat tests. > > Thanks > Pieter > > > > On 10/11/2015 21:40, Stephen Mallette wrote: > > sorry - don't know why i didn't question that ticket further. that's > > pretty awesome - no asserts. i can add that, but how did you know your > > tests aren't passing if there was no assert? > > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:35 PM, pieter <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Is it possible to have some discussion regarding > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-948 before 3.2.0 as I > >> now found myself in the scenario of not passing the test suite and not > >> sure of the resolution? > >> > >> Thanks > >> Pieter > >> > >> > >> > >> On 10/11/2015 20:02, Marko Rodriguez wrote: > >>> Hi Stephen, > >>> > >>> I concur. I have a list of notes that I've written that I will put into > >> JIRAs soon. Half will be possible for 3.1.1 and half will have to go > into > >> 3.2.0. > >>> However, I don't think we should just rush to get 3.2.0 out. I would be > >> happy to see 3.2.0 around March-ish+. > >>> Thanks, > >>> Marko. > >>> > >>> http://markorodriguez.com > >>> > >>> On Nov 10, 2015, at 10:59 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>>> I added 3.1.1-incubating to JIRA as the next release to start > >> planning. I > >>>> think it would be good to do at least one (two?) release on the 3.1.x > >> line > >>>> before we think too seriously about 3.2.x and major change. Would be > >> nice > >>>> to see this 3.1.1-incubating development period see some more > tutorials > >> and > >>>> other documentation, improve documentation organization, get apache > >> jenkins > >>>> flowing, etc. It seems to fit naturally into the slower holiday > period > >>>> when folks aren't around as much. We could then plan up 3.2.x in the > >> new > >>>> year. > >>>> > >>>> we'd continue to develop on master through the end of the year as that > >>>> would continue to house the 3.1.x line of code. > >>>> > >>>> Thoughts? > >> > >
