Re: [Exist-development] 4 failing tests on teamcity

[Dannes W. <da...@ex...>]

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:19 PM, James Fuller
<jam...@ex...> wrote:
> note we need to discuss about the lack of java properties being set
> for unit tests ... its somewhat limiting and the cause of failing
> tests at the moment on teamcity (though build is fine now).
>
> how do people feel if exist.home java property was available via unit
> tests ... is this too 'unclean' ? I think it maybe, though we probably
> also want to add some lowlevel unit tests for checking java properties
> as well ;)

That does quite reasonable. Well, there is one thing to add here: We
should think of a way where *all* extensions and indexes are built...
and tested. E.g. the spatial index is not tested on the build server
while there is a test suite available.

So basically we need to have a conf.xml and a
extensions/local.build.properties in which all these items are
enabled. Only this way we can detect issues in an early phase (we have
missed issues in spatial before, waste of our time that was)

anyway...all committers should run the junit suite first before
committing changes....... with all extensions enabled. I guess just a
few of us have all these things enabled. New rule for the Manifesto?

cheers

Dannes


-- 
eXist-db Native XML Database - http://exist-db.org
Join us on linked-in: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=35624