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

Re: migration to NODES

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:40:41 +0200

I'd rather have O(1) hand-crafted wc's than all 950 wc's the test suite
generates, of which likely 99% are 'normal'... (especially as it's the
end-of-run state, after any conflicts have been resolved etc)

Greg Stein wrote on Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 05:47:36 -0400:
> I took the 1.6.x branch and ran the test suite. It produced about 950
> working copies, and the (compressed) tarball sits at about 850k. I'm
> thinking about recording 'svn status' for each working copy, and
> checking the tarball in as test data. We can then run an 'svn upgrade'
> on each working copy, then 'svn status', and verify that the two
> status results match. (caveat minor improvements in state tracking and
> status reporting)
>
> But... running upgrade on about 950 working copies and checking their
> status isn't cheap. The tarball sizes don't bother me too much... I'm
> more concerned about test suite runtime.
>
> Anybody else? Should this be "normal test run"? Or should we set up an
> "extended" set of tests and drop this into that batch?
>
> Or not even go with this approach?
Received on 2010-09-28 15:42:08 CEST

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