Failing tests that can't be fixed should be commented out and a bug report should be opened. This is the policy that is used in other places.
I agree that tests should be cleaning up after themselves (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=209069) or at least make sure that deleting the config folder put you back in a clean state. In the framework admin tests I have taken the approach of storing files into BundleContext.getDataFile and also using the test class name as a unique token. Do we think this is enough? Wrt to the TestMetadataRepository, I must admit that I'm a bit surprised by the pollution it creates since it was supposed to be a in memory repo... I have opened bug https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=209588 As part of your tests, did you end up creating helpers facilitating the creation of artifact repo? PaScaL From: Jeff McAffer/Ottawa/[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Date: 11/12/2007 08:54 PM Subject: [equinox-dev] optimizers, tests and temp files I just committed another refactoring of the repo optimizers along with an improved version of the JarDelta optimizer and some basic tests. We should have well optimized repos now! (next step is to pack the jar deltas!!) In runnig the tests before committing there appear to be 11 of the Director tests failing. I did not do anything in this area so assume that they were failing before this new code came along? What is our policy on failing tests? I've been commenting out my tests that fail until they can be fixed. Others? A number of tests use the TestMetadataRepository mechanism. This is cool but unfortunately it leaves temp files down in Documents and Setting (Windows) at a pretty high rate (~30 per full test run). There are a few other files being left around. We should ensure that our tests run and clean up after themselves. In the optimizer tests I've taken to naming the files and dirs something related to the name of the test (e.g. p2.optimizers.xxx) so that people encountering these files (leftover from crashed test runs etc) know what they are. Do others think this to be a good idea? Related to this, we are all likely struggling to setup various repos etc temporarily for tests and inevitiably using different approaches. Would it be worth spending a bit of time creating some test repo infrastructure, documenting this on the wiki (or wherever) and then making the tests consistent? Most of the time I spend on this little project was in managing all the test code and updating multiple copies. Taht is, until I refactored to eliminate duplicate code. Now the test read well and are very easy to create. Easy to create tests => more tests => better code... Thoughts? Jeff_______________________________________________ equinox-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev _______________________________________________ equinox-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
