[Windmill-dev] Windmill 0.4 Roundup

[Matthew Eernisse]

How are you gentlemen,

Just a quick heads-up. I've updated the docs on the JS tests to reflect 
current reality, and there are some basic tests in SVN that can be used 
to try out the new features.

Adam, let me know what I can do to move the reporting stuff forward.

I also want to ask about the doco for the JS tests -- there's so much 
shared context between the way you organize, write, and run tests, it's 
kind of hard to paint a coherent picture when "writing" and "running" 
are supposed to be on two different pages.

Seems like including the content for running JS tests in with running 
all the other kinds of tests might not be the best way to organize 
things. I actually considered reorg'ing the wiki pages, but then I 
noticed all the pages URLs are numbered, and I'd be moving stuff in a 
way that would break numerical order.

I'd also like to add an "advanced usage" section for the JS tests.

What would be a good way to improve this situation?


Matthew

Adam Christian wrote:
> That's a good question, this may take some tinkering to come up with a 
> thorough way to test that functionality.. as soon as I have a minute I 
> will sit down and see if I can come up with something.
> 
> Do you guys have a set of JS Framework features you would like to start 
> with?
> 
> Adam
> 
> On Jan 29, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
> 
>>> Not sure how you'd write unit tests for filter/phase limiting, as 
>>> they're attributes of the *test run*, not anything in the tests 
>>> themselves. Their value is during dev and debugging, not during 
>>> actual testing. Anybody have any ideas how we could do tests for that?
>>
>> We do need to work out the semantic for you informing the backend of 
>> your whole test run status at the end of the test run.
>>
>> The results object you give to the backend will have the list of tests 
>> run.
>>
>> I'll be creating an XMLRPC method for executing the js framework. We 
>> can call that with various filter/phase limiting and check the test 
>> run result objects in pure Python.
>>
>> For now tho, we need unittests for all the jsTest methods, just like 
>> we have the vanilla windmill API. For now we can just focus on tests 
>> that return true, we can work out a way to test failures and waits 
>> later using something along the lines of what i outlined for the 
>> filter/phase limiting.
>>
>> We don't need 100% of the features covering in unittests before we 
>> release, i just want the first run of them in and we can 
>> improve/expand them later. As it stands we have zero, we definitely 
>> need more than zero before we release.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think Adam would be the one to ask about calling new methods on 
>>> test-run completion. Adam, any clue about that?
>>
>> Whoever wrote the code that calls report_without_resolve() would be 
>> the most likely person to do this work as well, whoever that is.
>>
>> -Mikeal
>> _______________________________________________
>> Windmill-dev mailing list
>> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/windmill-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Windmill-dev mailing list
> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/windmill-dev
>