Ahh - disclaimer for my last statement - I was only talking about the opensocial related tests... I don't usually check the non-social ones :)
- Cassie On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Don't suppose these are easy to fix on the javascript side? > > gadgets.io.* TestSuite: > > Description> Tests if we can get the proxy URL with given URL as proxy > [GIO101.0] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(String) - With valid URL.: PASS: (got > 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2F~user') > [GIO101.1] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(String) - With valid URL.: PASS: (got > 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2F~user') > [GIO102] [P2 ]:: gadgets.io.getProxyUrl() - With no parameters.: FAILED [458 > ms] > Description> Tests if we can call getProxyUrl API without any parameter and > it returns the proxy URL with empty proxy > [GIO102.0] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl() - With no parameters.: PASS: (got > 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=undefined') > [GIO102.1] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl() - With no parameters.: FAILED: (got > 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=undefined'), expected 'url=' > [GIO103] [P2 ]:: gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(null) - With null parameter.: FAILED > [462 ms] > Description> Tests if we can call getProxyUrl API with null as parameter and > it returns the proxy URL with empty proxy > [GIO103.0] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(null) - With null parameter.: PASS: (got > 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=null') > [GIO103.1] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(null) - With null parameter.: FAILED: (got > 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=null'), expected 'url=' > [GIO104] [P2 ]:: gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(undefined) - With undefined > parameter.: FAILED [466 ms] > Description> Tests if we can call getProxyUrl API with undefined as > parameter and it returns the proxy URL with empty proxy > [GIO104.0] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(undefined) - With undefined parameter.: > PASS: (got 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=undefined') > [GIO104.1] gadgets.io.getProxyUrl(undefined) - With undefined parameter.: > FAILED: (got 'proxy?refresh=3600&url=undefined'), expected 'url=' > > I'm just a sucker for seeing green boxes is all :) > > -- Chris > > On Aug 22, 2008, at 11:04 PM, Cassie wrote: > >> I check the compliance tests regularly for the actual deployment of >> Shindig >> that I work on at work. We are failing more now only because the tests are >> getting much more thorough. (The tests are also very active so sometimes >> they have bugs too although it is usually our code that's wrong :) >> >> I haven't found many issues with Shindig's actual js layer though - its >> usually been in the server layer and most often in the service >> implementations that are container specific. >> >> The non-rpc based container definitely has some issues though because it >> sending requests to the server in a json map format... which doesn't >> preserve order. So, some of the compliance tests would fail simply because >> they were fetching app data before it was updated and so forth. >> >> So... hopefully someone out there can get a patch to switch the php to rpc >> batching going :) >> >> - Cassie >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Dan Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> By the way, the docs for the compliance test suite are at: >>> http://code.google.com/p/opensocial-resources/wiki/ComplianceTests >>> >>> -Dan >>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Louis Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Im seeing some similar issues. One thing I noticed is that lookingFor is >>>> now >>>> an Enum in JS but its not the Java datamodel. Im going to fix that one. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> When running the compliance test suite: >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/tests/trunk/suites/0.7/compliance/reference/reference.xml >>>>> >>>>> I get 28 failed on my live version of partuza+php shindig ( >>>> >>>> www.partuza.nl is >>>>> >>>>> running a checkout that is about 1.5 weeks old), while the latest code >>>>> locally gives me 42 errors. >>>>> >>>>> To rule out that it wasn't the php code, i updated just shindig/php on >>>> >>>> the >>>>> >>>>> live server, and the error count didn't change, so it's probably some >>>>> shindig//features/* changes that cause this. >>>>> >>>>> Anyone checking if our JS code is 'compliant' ? And/or working on >>> >>> fixing >>>>> >>>>> it? Seems right now it's only getting less so :) >>>>> >>>>> -- Chris >>>>> >>>> >>> > >
