On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 08:06 +1200, Robert Collins wrote: > I'm still unconvinced that this is *actually* closer to how the code > runs in production, based on jml's response earlier in this thread.
I landed a few changes because of this. I think everyone should be aware of two discoveries that concerned me. 1. The while looking at one report on a naked object I saw a test description disagreed with a test result. I was really puzzled. Really, because I wrote all the code and I knew re-reading it that it was wrong. There was a typo in the attr assignment. Login with the wrapped object showed that that attr did not exist. Using the real attribute did make the test work as I expected: items orders from 'hot' to 'cold' 2. While wrapping the milestone I saw factory.makeMilestone() rarely made a valid milestone. A milestone must have a product or distro series. No test with a distro milestone could render a milestone, release, or distribution view. We did not have a test that exercised these conditions with the factory made milestone, but lp engineers have tried to help users be creating milestones using SQL, and these same milestones definitely cause exceptions last year. > With that in mind I'm entirely happy with disabling this check pending > future discussion, particularly as it is causing developers to feel > lots of friction. It certainly stole a day from me. I think the registry team have branches that fixed or fix all the issues reported running registry tests. -- __Curtis C. Hovey_________ http://launchpad.net/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
