Please don't actually slow down the time it takes to land code to trunk by
actually running the tests 2x in a row (and IME gccgo test suite is
actually more than 1x the time for the golang test suite to run).
I suppose if you can put them in parallel, but I'd really like to see it
just be a CI
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Ian Booth ian.bo...@canonical.com wrote:
We are working to make all juju-core unit tests pass using gccgo. In case you
didn't already know, there's a common issue which has caused a lot of the
failures to date. Here's a quick heads up on how to deal with it.
On 14 May 2014 10:24, Tim Penhey tim.pen...@canonical.com wrote:
Hi all,
I took it upon myself to get Rog's errgo library used inside juju-core.
Thanks for doing this.
Dimiter recently did a hunk of work in the juju-core/errors package to
have functions to add context to some core error
Although using DeepEquals on sorted lists does make for
easier-to-understand test failure messages, the burden on the developer to
sort the slices when they write the test doesn't seem worth it to me. We
write tests a lot more often than we need to debug failing tests. If it
was just slices of
I agree with Roger, I don't think a wrapper around Errgo is the right way
to go. If we don't like the way errgo behaves, we should change it. It's
our package, let's have it work the way we want it to work.
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:47 AM, roger peppe rogpe...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 May 2014
