Hi Daniel, On Fri, 2019-05-17 at 17:15 +0100, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Hi Severin, > > Here is an example of a manual test checked in in the jdk repo: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/tip/test/jdk/sun/security/provider/PolicyParser/ExtDirs.java > > - it has an @test annotation > - it has an @bug annotation > - it has an @run main/manual line > - it has a comment explaining how to run the test > (if necessary) and should have also explain > in which case it should be declared successful > or failed...
Thanks! How about this? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8203190/03/webrev/ Cheers, Severin > best regards, > > -- daniel > > On 17/05/2019 17:00, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > On Fri, 2019-05-17 at 16:28 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > > > On 17/05/2019 12:37, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > > > > > snip... > > > > > > > The reason was that it's not a good test to be run > > > > automatically. It > > > > would have to have some heuristic which it uses as "passed" and > > > > "fail". > > > > Checking in the code anyway has a tendency for it to bitrot. If > > > > you > > > > really feel strongly about it, I can add it. FWIW, the > > > > reference to the > > > > test isn't going away so it'll be available either way. > > > > > > > > > > I get that, but there are other manual tests in the repositories. > > > I saw > > > one yesterday that required downloading a font before running it. > > > I > > > think it better to have everything in one place rather than > > > relying on > > > someone to find this e-mail thread. > > > > > > The bitrot argument seems a little odd, given it would be more > > > open to > > > updates in the repositories rather than on a web server where > > > only you > > > can update it :/ > > > > Sure. Here the webrev with the test: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8203190/02/webrev/ > > > > OK to push? > > > > Thanks, > > Severin > >
