Re: Hudson unit test runs

From: Andrey Razumovsky (razumovsky.andre..mail.com)
Date: Fri Dec 11 2009 - 01:55:46 EST

  • Next message: Aristedes Maniatis: "Re: Hudson unit test runs"

    Well, how about the following situation I faced a number of times: the build
    is broken and I try to fix it. But I don't succeed.. so how should I know
    about that? Manually go&check in hudson? Not that handy.
    Of course, Hudson spamming is much worse. I'd rather we disable Derby builds
    until those two tests can work.

    2009/12/11 Aristedes Maniatis <ar..aniatis.org>

    > On 11/12/09 12:55 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> On Dec 10, 2009, at 6:14 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> How about something really simple like
    >>>
    >>> if (! System.getProperty("CayenneTestConnection").equals("derby")) {
    >>> run test...
    >>> }
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> That is, if these test failures are actually for real and SHOULD not
    >>> pass on Derby. Otherwise, I'll just configure Hudson to only send
    >>> emails when the test failures change from run to run, not when they
    >>> remain the same.
    >>>
    >>
    >> I think the later option is better for now. IIRC these should work on
    >> Derby, but the right implementation is just too quirky and waiting its
    >> time.
    >>
    >> Andrus
    >>
    >
    >
    > OK, I've done that now. We will not get emails after the first broken
    > build.
    >
    > Do we need Jira(s) for the broken tests on Derby? Are they the same issue
    > or two different things?
    >
    >
    > Ari Maniatis
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > -------------------------->
    > Aristedes Maniatis
    > GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
    >

    -- 
    Andrey
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Fri Dec 11 2009 - 01:56:42 EST