Gump a écrit :
> To whom it may engage...
>
> This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
> more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
> and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
>
> Project commons-math has an issue affecting its community integration.
> This issue affects 1 projects,
> and has been outstanding for 2 runs.
[snip]
> BUILD FAILED
> /srv/gump/public/workspace/apache-commons/math/build.xml:199: There were test
> failures.
The failed test is once again RandomDataTest.testNextPoissonConsistency.
The output is:
[junit] Testcase: testNextPoissonConsistency took 0.596 sec
[junit] FAILED
[junit] Chisquare test failed for mean = 2.0 p-value =
3.5409049905721357E-4 chisquare statistic = 20.7552099562672.
[junit] bin expected observed
[junit] [1,1) 135.34 165
[junit] [1,3) 541.34 572
[junit] [3,5) 270.67 226
[junit] [5,6) 36.09 23
[junit] [6,inf) 16.56 14
[junit] This test can fail randomly due to sampling error with
probability 0.0010.
I think it is the third time in less than 6 months and the second time
in row that this test fails, so the 0.001 failure probability seems
exceeded. IS this related to the comment we find in the test source:
// TODO: When MATH-282 is resolved, s/3000/10000 below
Would it be sensible to add some loop around the test and consider it
fails if 2 or 3 successive iterations all fail ? Would this really test
something ? Should this test be used only manually during development
and removed from the suite ?
I am puzzled by tests that can randomly fail and belong to an automatic
test suite.
Luc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
