Hi Atsushi, Thank you for these constructive comments. I personally was not aware that the build/test status was available.
I have reviewed with Igor the recent changes. The current failures are new tests. These failures are not related to the original problem you reported below. However, it would have been better to commit these tests with [NotWorking] attribute. Igor will commit by tomorrow a clean status in which either the tests are working, or they are marked with [NotWorking]. We will also try to maintain a cleaner test status of the committed code, and will pay closer attention to the ChangeLog comments. Noam -----Original Message----- From: Igor Zelmanovich Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 7:46 PM To: Atsushi Eno Cc: [email protected]; Noam Lampert; Eyal Alaluf Subject: RE: Sys.SM.Configuration changes caused too much regressions You refer to tests I added today. It is not regression, just new tests, And I am working on it right now. Please let me finish my work. I make a lot changes in configuration stuff, but it not suppose to affect other aspects of current implementation. Igor. -----Original Message----- From: Atsushi Eno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 7:33 PM To: Igor Zelmanovich Cc: [email protected]; Noam Lampert; Eyal Alaluf Subject: Re: Sys.SM.Configuration changes caused too much regressions No matter how it works in your machine, the tests are indeed broken as monobuild shows. See System.ServiceModel test results: http://mono.ximian.com/monobuild/python/monobuild.py http://mono.ximian.com/monobuild/builds/HEAD/suse-101-i586/olive/98880/l ogs/test.log BTW you always have meaningless ChangeLog entry such as: > Log: > fix implementation, refactoring but it is not true. For example for r98854 which you put *new file* which is neither implementation fix nor refactoring at all. Atsushi Eno Igor Zelmanovich wrote: > Hello Atsushi, > > There was some not implemented API in System.Configuration > I've implemented it in r98680 > > You have rebuild (and install) System.Configuration to have the tests > pass. > > I have no such regressions in my Ubuntu. > > If you still have any such regression, please send me exception's stack > trace. > Be sure I run nunit test suite each time I have commit. > > Igor Zelmanovich. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Atsushi Eno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 1:50 PM > To: Igor Zelmanovich > Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Sys.SM.Configuration changes caused too much regressions > > Hello Igor, > > I usually don't care too much about NUnit test regressions in the > face of significant development in olive, but lately you broke too > much tests due to System.ServiceModel.Configuration improvements. > More than 10 tests now fails with NotImplementedException which > is raised inside configuration stuff. > > Please remove any configuration hook from existing working stuff > such as ChannelFactory. If you do not, I'll revert several things > instead next week, which could mess your work. Thanks in advance. > > Atsushi Eno > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 2740 (20071221) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
