[ http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/notes/xfail-status ]
Paul Burba wrote on Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 21:53:34 -0500:
> Hi All,
>
> One of the roadmap items yet to be started was a 'test review' to
> 'Determine which XFail and WIP tests should remain so, and which need
> to be fixed before release.'
>
> I took a look at this today.
And looks like you did a thorough job at that; thanks!
> Keep in mind this is just a guess, if your name is there you aren't
> compelled to do anything...though I suspect we'd all agree it's bad
> form to create an XFailing test with no associated issue when we
> aren't planning on fixing the underlying problem.
>
Sometimes I commit an XFail test that I have no immediate intention to
work on myself; for example, just last week I committed two XFail tests
which arrived as patch submissions. There are other legitimate reasons
for adding XFail tests without immediatley working on a fix, I believe.
> If you have some time please look through the list. If a test you
> wrote needs an issue please write one up. If there is an existing
> issue that should be associated with a test add it. If an associated
> issue is unscheduled or never scheduled and you're familiar with it,
> please take a stab at some issue triage.
> LISTING: depth_tests.py
>
> Test # Mode Test Description
> ------ ----- ----------------
> 36 XFAIL 'info' should treat excluded item as versioned
> Issue #: None
> Target Milestone: N/A
> Thread: N/A
> Log: r876772
> Point Person: danielsh
Old bug. May not have an issue associated with it. I'll have a look,
but it shouldn't block 1.7.0.
> LISTING: prop_tests.py
>
> Test # Mode Test Description
> ------ ----- ----------------
> 12 XFAIL set, get, and delete a revprop change
> Issue #: 3086
> Target Milestone: 1.8-consider
> Thread: N/A
> Log: N/A
> Point Person: Unassigned
>
> 26 XFAIL test handling invalid svn:* property values
> Issue #: None
> Target Milestone: N/A
> Thread: N/A
> Log: r871212
> Point Person: danielsh
These two fail for the same reason --- something to do with
pre-revprop-change hooks over ra_dav. In any case, feel free to cross
#26 off your list; I'm sure it will be fixed as soon as #12 is.
Received on 2011-02-02 04:12:31 CET