Hi again, as you are asking for the STF stuff.
We currently have the problem that the STF regression is not run when a patch is commited to Gerrit. So it is possible to check in code (that is succesfully verified by the Jenkins CI) but will crash the STF regression. So you have the following options: Push the fix to Gerrit, add STF stuff + a test case in another patch OR Push the STF stuff first and then post another patch that does contain your fix + a test case. I also have no problems if you push all of your changes into one patch :P BR, Stefan Am 19.11.2012 12:49, schrieb Ercan Kücükkaraca: > Hi, > > thanks for your prompt reply on our questions! We decided to go with the > STF and set up a testing environment in accordance with [1]. However, we > have not been able to successfully run the test, as a couple of > exceptions is thrown. For a full stack trace see [2] (We hope this is an > appropriate format for sharing traces. See line 572 ff. for > exceptions...). It failed on both win7 and mac osx 10.8. > > Dou you have any idea what might cause these exceptions to be thrown? > Should we commit our changes/additions to /test/stf/ and > /test/framework/stf/src? > > Best regards, > Steffen & Ercan > > [1] https://www.mi.fu-berlin.de/w/SE/DPPTesting > [2] http://pastebin.com/rf7dKme3 > > On 18.11.2012 20:21, Stefan Rossbach wrote: >> Hi, >> >> if you can provide a JUNIT test please provide it (which would be a >> mocking "festival"). >> >> As for the STF, I think you have to add a method in >> the >> de.fu_berlin.inf.dpp.stf.server.rmi.remotebot.widget.impl.RemoteBotEditor >> class that implements the check or a method that returns the amount of >> annotations at the >> given offset (I would prefer the second approach). >> >> BR, >> Stefan >> >> Am 18.11.2012 15:40, schrieb Ercan Kücükkaraca: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Steffen and I have a couple of questions regarding the TestCase we were >>> meaning to create for our issue[1]: >>> >>> We would like to simulate a session as described in [1] and then check >>> whether there are > 1 annotations at the same offset in the given >>> annotationModels. Looking at [2] and several other TestCases, we have >>> figured out how to create such a session using STF with multiple users. >>> However, we have not been able to find a way to access the >>> annotationModels so far. >>> >>> Actually, it is still not clear to us, if we should utilize the STF at >>> all or rather a standard junit Test. Are there allready any test cases >>> for annotations, which we could use for orientation? If not, are there >>> other closely related ones? >>> >>> Thanks in advance for your help! And sapologies for bothering you on >>> sunday :) >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Steffen & Ercan >>> >>> [1] >>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3544370&group_id=167540&atid=843359 >>> >>> [2] https://www.mi.fu-berlin.de/wiki/pub/SE/DPPTesting/STF_Manual_v2.pdf >>> >>> On 17.11.2012 14:08, Ercan Kücükkaraca wrote: >>>> Hi Stefan and Franz, >>>> >>>> thanks for your replies. Steffen and I shall try to finish our solution >>>> and commit our changes for review asap. Would you please be so kind to >>>> approve ercankk/ercan.kuecuekkar...@fu-berlin.de for Gerrit in the >>>> meantime? >>>> >>>> Have a nice weekend! Best regards, >>>> Steffen & Ercan >>>> >>>> On 14.11.2012 22:49, Zieris, Franz wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I agree with Stefan. And I favor option 1 as it seems natural to me. >>>>> >>>>> Franz >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________________________ >>>>> From: Stefan Rossbach [mailto:srossb...@arcor.de] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 8:28 PM >>>>> To: Steffen Pade >>>>> Cc: Ercan Kücükkaraca; Zieris, Franz; dpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> Subject: Re: [DPP-Devel] Bug 3572498 >>>>> >>>>> Hi Ercan and Steffen, >>>>> >>>>> I think >>>>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2706995&group_id=167540&atid=843359 >>>>> is caused by the Activity Sequencer when it merges (optimizes) >>>>> TextActivites. Instead of sending >>>>> a TextActivity like: user entered A, then B, then C ... it sends >>>>> the TextActivity: user entered ABC at once. >>>>> >>>>> Option 2 is a no go. If some insert a large block per C&P, the CPU >>>>> load will go mad if you >>>>> do not use the bulk method for inserting annotations into the >>>>> annotation model. The >>>>> option will also suffer from the fact that you are discarding >>>>> information when the >>>>> C&P text is larger than 20 characters. >>>>> >>>>> Franz your opinion ? >>>>> >>>>> BR, >>>>> Stefan >>>>> >>>>> Am 14.11.2012 19:57, schrieb Steffen Pade: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> thank you for pointing us in the right direction! We believe that we >>>>> have been able to isolate the issue: >>>>> >>>>> If some characters are put inbetween a larger chunk of text that has >>>>> been annotated by one large annotation (as c&p'ed text is), this large >>>>> annotation will not be split, but rather 'overridden' by the latest 20 >>>>> chars. Because of this 20 annotation per user limit, those newly input >>>>> chars will start to be 'reclaimed' by that one large annotation, as >>>>> soon >>>>> as the maximum amount of annotations is exceeded. We thought about two >>>>> solution approaches, we would like to discuss, one of which we favour >>>>> (the first one): >>>>> >>>>> 1. As it is done with another users' annotations, when something is >>>>> written >>>>> locally, split those annotations as well because of a third party's >>>>> update. We believe that in >>>>> de.fu_berlin.inf.dpp.editor.replaceText(...) >>>>> the ContributionAnnotationManager's splitAnnotation()-function has >>>>> to be >>>>> called before the remote annotation is inserted. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Instead of annotating a larger chunk of text, annotate each >>>>> character >>>>> individually (this approach would probably kill performance-wise and >>>>> remove some desired functionality). Meaning only the last 20 chars of >>>>> a pasted text would be annotated. >>>>> >>>>> Another approach would be >>>>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2706995&group_id=167540&atid=843359, >>>>> >>>>> of course. If you favor that one, however, we would like you to >>>>> elaborate, whether that behavior should apply to c&p'ed text having >>>>> < 20 >>>>> characters as well, etc. >>>>> >>>>> Your feedback on this issue is appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Ercan & Steffen >>>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single >>>> web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, >>>> vmware, >>>> SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. >>>> Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! >>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> DPP-Devel mailing list >>>> DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov _______________________________________________ DPP-Devel mailing list DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel
