> On 2012-04-25 18:28:08, Ali Lown wrote:
> > I don't like the idea of 'fixing' this test by bypassing flushing the 
> > deltas, since this seems to defeat the purpose of 'testing' this code 
> > because a different program flow will be used in the actual server.
> > 
> > When did this test break?

I think you are right.


- Yuri


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/4868/#review7231
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2012-04-25 16:23:14, Yuri Zelikov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/4868/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2012-04-25 16:23:14)
> 
> 
> Review request for wave, Michael MacFadden and Ali Lown.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> Fixes breakage in WaveletContainerTest by adding means to control deltas 
> flushing + adds some state validations and two more tests.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   test/org/waveprotocol/box/server/waveserver/WaveletStateTestBase.java 
> 3f316f8 
>   test/org/waveprotocol/box/server/waveserver/WaveletContainerTest.java 
> cd5b92e 
>   src/org/waveprotocol/box/server/waveserver/WaveletContainerImpl.java 
> 9eaac43 
>   src/org/waveprotocol/box/server/waveserver/RemoteWaveletContainerImpl.java 
> ceb0862 
>   src/org/waveprotocol/box/server/waveserver/DeltaStoreBasedWaveletState.java 
> a0c559c 
>   src/org/waveprotocol/box/server/waveserver/LocalWaveletContainerImpl.java 
> 74f7590 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/4868/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Verified that WaveletContainerTest passed.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Yuri
> 
>

Reply via email to