[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Status of TODO-1.6

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 13:12:35 -0600

Kouhei Sutou wrote:
> Hi,
> In <495271AD.8020401_at_mail.utexas.edu>
> "Status of TODO-1.6" on Wed, 24 Dec 2008 11:30:21 -0600,
> "Hyrum K. Wright" <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>> * Test failures in Ruby bindings.
>> These just look like they are the result of wrong expectations due to tree
>> conflicts, but my understanding of ruby and the swig-rb bindings is so
>> rudimentary as to remove all confidence in my ability to track it down. Kou,
>> Joe, any suggestions?
> The current test suits were all passed when they were
> created. It means the current Subversion behavior is changed
> since the time.
> I don't know about tree conflicts. If the current actual
> values are expected result, we should change the current
> expected values. But I can't decide it...

And I don't know enough about ruby and the test suite to determine exactly what
the offending tests are testing. Either somebody with knowledge of both should
comment, or perhaps you can give us an overview of what the tests are doing, and
one of the tree conflicts people can comment on whether or not the new failures
are expected.



Received on 2008-12-26 20:13:04 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.