mdipierro | 1 Nov 18:52 2010
Picon

Re: web2py 1.88.1 is OUT

I think this is a good idea.

On Nov 1, 7:24 am, Martín Mulone <mulone.mar...@...> wrote:
> I'm going to start an w2p-app, called app by an example or testing app. The
> idea is to have in one app some code for testing pourpose, that make for
> example insert,select,delete like the code in the bottom of sql.py. What do
> you think?.
>
> 2010/10/30 rochacbruno <rochacbr...@...>
>
>
>
> > At my company we started to use this
>
> >http://www.reviewboard.org/
>
> > Integrated with hg
>
> > I suggest to start using this integrated with the main web2py repository.
>
> > Enviado via iPhone
>
> > Em 30/10/2010, às 21:33, mart <msenecal...@...> escreveu:
>
> > > BTW - have you seen Mondrian? - is built on Perforce.
>
> > >http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8502904076440714866#
>
> > > Mart
>
> > > On Oct 30, 7:24 pm, mart <msenecal...@...> wrote:
> > >> Hey,
>
> > >> Would it make sense not to pull the apps that get built against #head
> > >> revision (unless the goal is to test the apps themselves) and
> > >> preferably just pull the code line it self  <at>  #head revision? (follow
> > >> up on this in next paragraph) And also, I don't know where things
> > >> stand wrt bug tracking, but an important consideration are the bug
> > >> fixes ("does this build contain the fix for Bug X?"). Typically when
> > >> bugs get resolved/closed, they get verified on a clean slate, then
> > >> once validated & blessed (or rejected), the fix can be made public.
>
> > >> I think the process is pretty close to what Thadeus mentioned, but
> > >> would add the integration to bug tracking (this data is usually made
> > >> part of the release notes specifically instead of a description typed
> > >> in  <at>  commit time). if the desire is automation (smoke tests) that I
> > >> would store the raw data of the "generic app" in some dedicated
> > >> tables, then re-populate the all-encompassing app with current data.
> > >> By always grabbing latest_row, you keep the previous data for the
> > >> previous build/release intact and in the correct place (so you don't
> > >> need to change the test process from release to release, and you have
> > >> the the build process insert a new set of records  <at>  build time
> > >> referencing the current build. With this, you also have
> > >> reproducibility if needed.
>
> > >> Last point, and I know I am persistently annoying with this, but
> > >> mercurial, IMHO, sucks, sucks a lot. Personally I would use nothing
> > >> less then the best out there, Perforce, specially if considering
> > >> automated testing (again IMHO, but at least a fairly well supported
> > >> statement :)). web2py is Open source, Perforce does give additional
> > >> user licenses to open source projects (I'm sure Massimo would only
> > >> need to make the request (which is online  <at>  perforce .com btw). I
> > >> mention that here because, good testing processes should be well
> > >> integrated to source control. and for the web2py user, offering time
> > >> for testing, a local instance of the perforce server can be installed,
> > >> absolutely free of charge (with a max of 2 user licenses per server -
> > >> more than enough for "remote workers" who can very easily keep in sync
> > >> with the "main web2py" server (I work from home (Quebec, Canada), work
> > >> for an American based company (HQ in Sunnyvale) - and that is how I do
> > >> my work, with my local p4D. works like a charm). Anyways, enough of
> > >> that, just thought I'd find another reason to slide that in ;)
>
> > >> regards,
> > >> Mart :)
>
> > >> On Oct 30, 2:58 pm, Luther Goh Lu Feng <elf...@...> wrote:
>
> > >>> It is reasonable to suggest a universal test app that will assist in
> > >>> the quality assurance of web2py. But I wonder if this will always have
> > >>> 100% test coverage, given that bugs may appear even when writing test
> > >>> cases. This is still a good idea compared to not having a test suite.
>
> > >>> However, I think I would have a greater sense of security if I am able
> > >>> to test the apps I have written against the nightly/trunk build.
>
> > >>> On Oct 31, 1:46 am, Thadeus Burgess <thade...@...> wrote:
>
> > >>>> Where should the list of apps come from? I think this is the biggest
> > >>>> question.
>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Thadeus
>
> > >>>> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Thadeus Burgess <
> > thade...@...>wrote:
>
> > >>>>> Someone writes a script to automate the process. Have a list of apps
> > that
> > >>>>> we want to be sure are tested and working. The script will download
> > web2py
> > >>>>> testing, copy the apps to the downloaded version, fire a process fork
> > to
> > >>>>> start that web2py, use urllib or httplib to navigate to each of the
> > apps
> > >>>>> pages to verify that things are working. If a response code of 500 is
> > ever
> > >>>>> received then go get the error ticket and store it somewhere central
> > >>>>> including which app it came from.
>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Thadeus
>
> > >>>>> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng <
> > elf...@...>wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> On Oct 30, 7:05 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@...> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Normally it goes to the nightly build, perhaps not exactly the
> > latest
> > >>>>>>> but something very close. The bug in question has been there for
> > about
> > >>>>>>> one week. The problem is that nobody tests the nightly build.
>
> > >>>>>>> Massimo
>
> > >>>>>> I would love to have a way to test non stable builds easily with my
> > >>>>>> existing apps. How does one do so besides downloading the trunk/
> > >>>>>> nightly build, and then exporting the apps from stable web2py and
> > then
> > >>>>>> import to the trunk/nightly web2py?
>
> --
> My blog:http://martin.tecnodoc.com.ar
> My portfolio *spanish*:http://www.tecnodoc.com.ar
> Checkout my last proyect instant-press:http://www.instant2press.com


Gmane