Keith
I forwarded the mail because it is interesting for everybody.
The situation is getting messy.
Not really
Code does not work -> moved to treatedInbox and we pass to the next
items.
Cheers,
Alexandre
exactly... everyone doing their own thing for their own reasons. Will
you be willing to help restore some coherence to the picture.
I set a few goals that are fulfilled in my derived implementation. My
improvements are based upon more than 10 years of experience of using
SUnit and things like it. These have been out there for 2 years, so
there is no reason why people cannot build upon this base.
1. Ability to define test suites, and have a UI for running test
suites.
I have been using this facility for 8 years in st/x and always miss
it
in squeak. I want to be able to define a suite for "My Project".
2. Ability to flag which tests are expected to work in which
situation,
which image version and which platform. So that I can run with "all
tests green" even if I happen to have a few windows specific tests,
when
I am running on a mac.
3. Ability to use tests to specify behaviour and requirements even
before the tests work. I.e. mark tests as #toDo.
4. Ability to run tests in an automated tool, without a UI.
5. Ability to sort tests so that they are run fastest first. 95% of
the
tests will run in 10% of the time.
6. Ability to determine whether a test used the network or not, and
filter out those tests if necessary.
7. Ability to integrate other testing technologies like SSpec. (not
actually done, but conceptually possible now)
A couple of other improvements are also included, such as the
ability to
define a custom exception handler around all of your tests.
In my opinion some members of the Pharo team have a big problem with
"Not Invented Here". They don't even look at the existing stuff
before
diving in.
Keith let me reply friendly
- I mentioned several times that we want to have a look
but my time is quite short.
if people in the community take time to have a real look at your
extensions
and how we can integrate them, and write a report the item will move
higher up in our todo.
I spent several months integrating the fixes from 3 separate
streams of
Monticello, specifically with the goal of promoting coherence
within all
of the the squeak communities. I did this work for the benefit of all
squeak users, not for the benefit of my health or financial well
being.
In fact it has cost me several thousands of pounds in lost revenue.
I can understand. For Installer I did my job, I review the code and
matthew refactored it and this is much better now (except that I
cannot run the test
because of a dependency to cloner).
We have somebody writing a chapter on Installer, the next item is on
Sake
Now sometimes you give messages that are not totally clear.
and this can be at the level of code formatting (no joke) putting
sperate lines
everywhere without tabs .... gives a bad impression that you want it
or not.
Finally, we disagree on the process (fetching tuff from a web site/
magic auto integration...)
of course the process is not the tool and we should have a look at
MC15. and MC1.6
I tried MC1.5 and it failed on me. You fixed the problem but I have
to retry.
Then again (this month I have two proposals, one book to finish,
several articles to write
tons of meetings, phd defense, porting moose to squeak and I want
pharo to make progress).
So if people from the community can have a look and report this item
will move higher
up the pending item list.
Now all our infrastructure is depending on MC and we pay attention to
it.
I am actually fairly insulted by the attitude of the Pharo team
towards
this work. Since they take MC and continue to work on it
separately, it
actually renders all of my effort a waste of time.
Do not feel insulted. We do not that on purpose.
Our changes are not that much and we have to make 100% sure our
process works.
This does not imply that we will not look at it. But again I do not
have the time.
perhaps we can rescue sunit before it is too late.
Yes now when I looked at Sunit Extensions I was worried that I do not
understand all the changes
and I was not sure that Sspec support was important.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
