[Windmill-dev] Windmill 0.4 Roundup
adam.christian at gmail.com
Fri Feb 15 17:48:25 PST 2008
I should have my computer situation figured out this weekend then I
will get to give you a real response.
However I agree with all of your idears.
On Feb 14, 2008, at 9:39 PM, Matthew Eernisse <mde at osafoundation.org>
> 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?
> 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?
>> 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
>>> 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.
>>> Windmill-dev mailing list
>>> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
>> Windmill-dev mailing list
>> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
> Windmill-dev mailing list
> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
More information about the Windmill-dev