Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Godefroid Chapelle wrote:
>> Tres Seaver wrote:
>>
>>> As an aside / vent: the reason for the now-removed EXTERNALS.txt files
>>> was to keep the canonical information about the externals in a diffable
>>> file: why subversion can't do a proper diff on its own
Previously Godefroid Chapelle wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>
> >
> > As an aside / vent: the reason for the now-removed EXTERNALS.txt files
> > was to keep the canonical information about the externals in a diffable
> > file: why subversion can't do a proper diff on its own line-oriented
> > pro
Tres Seaver wrote:
>
> As an aside / vent: the reason for the now-removed EXTERNALS.txt files
> was to keep the canonical information about the externals in a diffable
> file: why subversion can't do a proper diff on its own line-oriented
> property is beyond me. Another benefit of an EXTERNAL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
> Hi Tres,
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My hypothesis is that one or more of the 'svn:externals' changes Sidnei
>> made to bring in 2.6-compatible packages is the culprit (maybe a
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 04:21:51PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
> > As an aside / vent: the reason for the now-removed EXTERNALS.txt files
> > was to keep the canonical information about the externals in a diffable
> > file: why subversion can't do a proper diff
Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
> As an aside / vent: the reason for the now-removed EXTERNALS.txt files
> was to keep the canonical information about the externals in a diffable
> file: why subversion can't do a proper diff on its own line-oriented
> property is beyond me. Another benefit of an E
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>> In general all tests pass now, when run from the eggified Zope in:
>>> svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/Zope2.buildout/trunk
>> I just vendor imported mechanize 0.1.9 into the Z
Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> In general all tests pass now, when run from the eggified Zope in:
>
>> svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/Zope2.buildout/trunk
>
> I just vendor imported mechanize 0.1.9 into the Zope SVN, and have
> changed the svn:external in my Z2 trunk checkout to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I just looked over this and fixed one test failure in Five.
I will trust that stubbing out the assertions in the 'update' method
(revision 93450) is the Right Thing (TM).
> In general all tests pass now, when run f
Hi.
I just looked over this and fixed one test failure in Five. In general
all tests pass now, when run from the eggified Zope in:
svn://svn.zope.org/repos/main/Zope2.buildout/trunk
I guess that the zope.testbrowser problems are a mix of test
interdependencies and maybe a differing mechanize ver
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Benji York <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm working on a new package (maybe named zope.functionaltesting) that
> will provide only what's needed for functional testing of Zope 3 apps
> using testbrowser without all the baggage of zope.app.testing (see
> http://hann
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Benji York <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Note that this means that any other package which wants to use
>> zope.testbrowser to run functional tests also suffers, transitively,
>> from the hai
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did notice that revision 92597, whose log message was "Revert to an
> older zope.testing. New one is way too new", also bumpted
> zope.testbrowser from 3.4.2 to 3.5.1. Reverting to 3.4.2 doesn't get
> the tests to pass, h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
> It is certainly in my plans to look at this. With December right
> ahead, I'm sure I will make time for this before the end of this year.
Hmm, just let me note that we have had the Zope2 trunk broken now broken
for a month, w
It is certainly in my plans to look at this. With December right
ahead, I'm sure I will make time for this before the end of this year.
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Tres Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Any chance you can get these worked
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Any chance you can get these worked out? I looked at the Products.Five
tests today, with the following observations:
- Not as many tests fail if I run '-s Products.Five' as when I run the
whole set: in particular, the first two in 'aqlegacy_ftes
16 matches
Mail list logo
