soaplite-devel

[Soaplite-devel] SOAP::Lite development - next release

[Martin K. <mar...@fe...>]

Hi there,

the good news first: I think it's already time for a new release. It's
mainly a bugfix release, but I think it would be nice to show the world
SOAP::Lite's still alive.
Changes so far are:

(+ means new feature, ! means bugfix, # are CPAN RT issues, [ 123456 ]
SF.net bugs ):

  + Added LOOPBACK test transport backend.
  + Added more core tests
  ! Fixed #14052: 'use base' pragma no longer works for SOAP::Lite
  ! Fixed #27032: Some debugging-aid patches
  ! Fixed #22732: Documentation error for use_prefix()
  ! Fixed [ 1044270 ] Suppress type for array when autotyping off
  ! Fixed [ 1665916 ] encode_scalar needs "no strict 'refs'"?
  ! Fixed [ 1481017 ] Typo on CPAN's documentation
  ! Fixed [ 1750846 ] Error with ENV{EXPECT}
  ! Fixed [ 887015 ] Memory Leak
  ! Fixed [ 1700326 ] encode_data called incorrectly in envelope
  ! Fixed [ 1612405 ] Incorrect deserialization of arrays/vectors
  ! Fixed [ 1204279 ] Boolean serialization error and added test
  ! Fixed [ 1569418 ] anyURI Serialization problem

The bad news are: The extended test suite does not work (or better: does
not seem to produce usable results). 
Without further investigation, it looks just like most of the web
services accessed as test have closed down in the meantime or don't
return the expected result (for example, the ActiveState WS returns
something (a empty search response), but not the data expected.

Has someone here tried the extended test suite lately? Any hints?

If there's only similar experience, I'd just remove the "real world"
SOAP tests, add one or to I know working and wrap everything up.

Are there any places besides CPAN and sourceforge to put releases onto?

Thanks for your help,

Martin

Re: [Soaplite-devel] SOAP::Lite development - next release

[Matthew R. <mr...@za...>]

Yes, the test suite ran upon install has been failing for some time  
now. I've been ignoring it, and --force installing. I vote to remove  
it - add in a couple you know are live and go for it.

+--------------------------------------------------------+
  | Matthew Runo
  | Zappos Development
  | mr...@za...
  | 702-943-7833
+--------------------------------------------------------+


On Oct 9, 2007, at 9:53 AM, Martin Kutter wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> the good news first: I think it's already time for a new release. It's
> mainly a bugfix release, but I think it would be nice to show the  
> world
> SOAP::Lite's still alive.
> Changes so far are:
>
> (+ means new feature, ! means bugfix, # are CPAN RT issues, [ 123456 ]
> SF.net bugs ):
>
>   + Added LOOPBACK test transport backend.
>   + Added more core tests
>   ! Fixed #14052: 'use base' pragma no longer works for SOAP::Lite
>   ! Fixed #27032: Some debugging-aid patches
>   ! Fixed #22732: Documentation error for use_prefix()
>   ! Fixed [ 1044270 ] Suppress type for array when autotyping off
>   ! Fixed [ 1665916 ] encode_scalar needs "no strict 'refs'"?
>   ! Fixed [ 1481017 ] Typo on CPAN's documentation
>   ! Fixed [ 1750846 ] Error with ENV{EXPECT}
>   ! Fixed [ 887015 ] Memory Leak
>   ! Fixed [ 1700326 ] encode_data called incorrectly in envelope
>   ! Fixed [ 1612405 ] Incorrect deserialization of arrays/vectors
>   ! Fixed [ 1204279 ] Boolean serialization error and added test
>   ! Fixed [ 1569418 ] anyURI Serialization problem
>
> The bad news are: The extended test suite does not work (or better:  
> does
> not seem to produce usable results).
> Without further investigation, it looks just like most of the web
> services accessed as test have closed down in the meantime or don't
> return the expected result (for example, the ActiveState WS returns
> something (a empty search response), but not the data expected.
>
> Has someone here tried the extended test suite lately? Any hints?
>
> If there's only similar experience, I'd just remove the "real world"
> SOAP tests, add one or to I know working and wrap everything up.
>
> Are there any places besides CPAN and sourceforge to put releases  
> onto?
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Martin
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a  
> browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Soaplite-devel mailing list
> Soa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soaplite-devel
>

Re: [Soaplite-devel] SOAP::Lite development - next release

[Robert L. <rla...@ao...>]

Matthew Runo wrote:
> Yes, the test suite ran upon install has been failing for some time  
> now. I've been ignoring it, and --force installing. I vote to remove  
> it - add in a couple you know are live and go for it.
> 

That's sort of the problem.  What is live, and what is going to be live 
in perpetuity.

It's a trivial matter to test against local services, but more often 
than not, I find services written in Java, C#, etc, to be incompatible 
with the current SOAP::Lite implementation... And that just within my 
organization.  :(

I found this...  http://www.xmethods.net/ilab/

I haven't looked at the test suite, so I'm not sure how many these are 
actually being tested.

Rob

Re: [Soaplite-devel] SOAP::Lite development - next release

[<mr...@za...>]

Yes. Local services are, of course, better - but cannot be counted on =20
being available all the time when someone is installing SOAP::Lite.

Google has a good websearch API, I believe. Amazon has one too. I =20
believe there is a National Weather Service one too. Things like this =20
might be a good way to test an install, as they've been around for =20
years, and are not likely to disappear in the near future. Of course, =20
nothing is 100%.

Maybe we could make the tests optional - and say what each test is =20
testing. That way, when 40% fail next year, I can see that X Y and Z =20
are untested because they failed, but features A B and C should still =20
work fine.

--Matthew

Quoting Robert Landrum <rla...@ao...>:

> Matthew Runo wrote:
>> Yes, the test suite ran upon install has been failing for some time =20
>>   now. I've been ignoring it, and --force installing. I vote to  =20
>> remove  it - add in a couple you know are live and go for it.
>>
>
> That's sort of the problem.  What is live, and what is going to be live
> in perpetuity.
>
> It's a trivial matter to test against local services, but more often
> than not, I find services written in Java, C#, etc, to be incompatible
> with the current SOAP::Lite implementation... And that just within my
> organization.  :(
>
> I found this...  http://www.xmethods.net/ilab/
>
> I haven't looked at the test suite, so I'm not sure how many these are
> actually being tested.
>
> Rob



----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Re: [Soaplite-devel] SOAP::Lite development - next release

[Paul K. <pau...@ya...>]

> Maybe we could make the tests optional - and say what each test is 
> testing. That way, when 40% fail next year, I can see that X Y and

In fact, all external tests were supposed to be optional; with 'no'
as the default answer to the question on whether they need to be run
(to work properly for automated/CPAN installs). Not sure what was
changed to trigger those tests.

I agree with updating the test suite and removing everything that is
not currently working.

Paul.

--- mr...@za... wrote:

> Yes. Local services are, of course, better - but cannot be counted
> on  
> being available all the time when someone is installing SOAP::Lite.
> 
> Google has a good websearch API, I believe. Amazon has one too. I  
> believe there is a National Weather Service one too. Things like
> this  
> might be a good way to test an install, as they've been around for 
> 
> years, and are not likely to disappear in the near future. Of
> course,  
> nothing is 100%.
> 
> Maybe we could make the tests optional - and say what each test is 
> 
> testing. That way, when 40% fail next year, I can see that X Y and
> Z  
> are untested because they failed, but features A B and C should
> still  
> work fine.
> 
> --Matthew
> 
> Quoting Robert Landrum <rla...@ao...>:
> 
> > Matthew Runo wrote:
> >> Yes, the test suite ran upon install has been failing for some
> time  
> >>   now. I've been ignoring it, and --force installing. I vote to 
>  
> >> remove  it - add in a couple you know are live and go for it.
> >>
> >
> > That's sort of the problem.  What is live, and what is going to
> be live
> > in perpetuity.
> >
> > It's a trivial matter to test against local services, but more
> often
> > than not, I find services written in Java, C#, etc, to be
> incompatible
> > with the current SOAP::Lite implementation... And that just
> within my
> > organization.  :(
> >
> > I found this...  http://www.xmethods.net/ilab/
> >
> > I haven't looked at the test suite, so I'm not sure how many
> these are
> > actually being tested.
> >
> > Rob
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> 
> 
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a
> browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Soaplite-devel mailing list
> Soa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soaplite-devel
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. 
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433