In PouchDB we used to generate unique database names for tests, however we removed it for serveral reasons, one large reason being it indicates a race condition in critical code if we cannot reliably create -> delete -> create the same database (we have uncovered and fixed a lot of bugs in PouchDB due to this). While its not my call how to prioritise those bugs, I really do not think we should be closing what are fairly serious bugs because it wasnt inconvenient to workaround them in the couch test suite.
On 2 September 2016 at 10:31, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Nolan, Will: > > A further update from looking deeper with @janl. It appears that we > have a pending fix for COUCHDB-3017 and we'll work on getting that > merged before 2.0. > > COUCHDB-3034 is a WONTFIX. FYI in CouchDB itself we changed all of > our tests to use unique database names. I'll update the bug myself > shortly. > > -Joan > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Joan Touzet" <woh...@apache.org> > > To: dev@couchdb.apache.org > > Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 5:15:00 AM > > Subject: Re: Getting libraries to test RCs > > > > Hi Will, > > > > Neither of these are currently tagged as blocking issues for CouchDB > > 2.0, only major priority. If you want to flag them as such, this is > > your last chance, and even still, there's no guarantee fixes for them > > will hit 2.0. > > > > Erlangers, is there any chance of at least triaging these today? > > > > -Joan > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Will Holley" <willhol...@gmail.com> > > > To: dev@couchdb.apache.org, "Joan Touzet" <woh...@apache.org> > > > Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 4:43:48 AM > > > Subject: Re: Getting libraries to test RCs > > > > > > Assuming nothing's changed in the last few weeks, there are 2 > > > issues > > > which cause the PouchDB tests to fail against master: COUCHDB-3017 > > > and > > > COUCHDB-3034. > > > > > > Both could be addressed in the test suite by using different > > > database > > > names for each test, but that's quite a disruptive change. > > > > > > On 2 September 2016 at 03:15, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > Hi Nolan, you state that it's 'failing for known reasons.' Is > > > > that > > > > reasons in PouchDB or anything you need to push back on us? We'd > > > > like > > > > to know ASAP as we're very, very close to releasing 2.0 now. > > > > > > > > I have zero PouchDB knowledge so I'm hoping you can give us a > > > > short > > > > summary of what you think is wrong. > > > > > > > > All the best, > > > > Joan > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > >> From: "Nolan Lawson" <no...@nolanlawson.com> > > > >> To: dev@couchdb.apache.org > > > >> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 7:56:42 PM > > > >> Subject: Re: Getting libraries to test RCs > > > >> > > > >> We have been testing CouchDB master in PouchDB for months now, > > > >> but > > > >> as > > > >> an allowed failure because I believe it’s failing for known > > > >> reasons. > > > >> We test both using Node.js and the browser. > > > >> > > > >> Node: https://travis-ci.org/pouchdb/pouchdb/jobs/156198210 > > > >> Browser: https://travis-ci.org/pouchdb/pouchdb/jobs/156198211 > > > >> > > > >> For anyone who wants to run the Pouch test suite against > > > >> CouchDB, > > > >> it’s just: > > > >> > > > >> git clone https://github.com/pouchdb/pouchdb.git > > > >> cd pouchdb > > > >> npm I > > > >> COUCH_HOST=http://localhost:5984 BAIL=0 npm t > > > >> > > > >> BAIL=0 will tell it to run the full test suite and not stop on > > > >> any > > > >> failures. That way you can inspect the failures and see if > > > >> they’re > > > >> serious or not. > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Nolan > > > >> > > > >> > On Aug 29, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > Anyone on this list who could help with this? The work items > > > >> > are > > > >> > fairly self-explanatory and not very big individually <3 > > > >> > > > > >> > Best > > > >> > Jan > > > >> > -- > > > >> > > > > >> >> On 10 Aug 2016, at 09:37, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> > > > >> >> wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Hey everyone, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> from Joan’s excellent blog post about testing Release > > > >> >> Candidates: > > > >> >> > > > >> >>> To our valued CouchDB application and library developers: > > > >> >>> please, > > > >> >>> please run your software against each of the options below. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> — https://blog.couchdb.org/2016/08/08/release-candidates/ > > > >> >> > > > >> >> I think we can be a little more proactive about this for > > > >> >> CouchDB > > > >> >> client libraries: let’s open issues on all the > > > >> >> CouchDB-compatible > > > >> >> client software we care about to test an RC. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Since there are a lot of projects, and we don’t necessarily > > > >> >> know > > > >> >> which one we “care” about, we should try to be clever about > > > >> >> it. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Maybe something like this can work: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> 1. We prepare an issue text explaining the thing: Heya, > > > >> >> CouchDB > > > >> >> team here, major new version coming up, you should test it > > > >> >> like > > > >> >> so: <include instructions to test against a 3-node cluster. > > > >> >> Maybe > > > >> >> even provide a cluster to do this, or Cloudant can sponsor > > > >> >> something? > > > >> >> > > > >> >> 2. Post this message with a call to action on user@c.a.o, the > > > >> >> weekly news, and our other (social) media channels. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> 3. Ask people who submitted an issue to report back with a > > > >> >> link. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> 4. Collect the link in an issue or JIRA (this could be done > > > >> >> in > > > >> >> 3., > > > >> >> but then everybody needs to be added to the wiki write group, > > > >> >> and > > > >> >> that’s just extra overhead we don’t need). Maybe we borrow a > > > >> >> gist > > > >> >> for this, or a Google doc. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> That way we encourage client software to check out RCs and we > > > >> >> can > > > >> >> keep track, while the community helps to select which > > > >> >> software > > > >> >> to > > > >> >> encourage to test 2.0 compat, and helps spread the word and > > > >> >> the > > > >> >> burden is not left with just a few folks. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> What do you think? > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Best > > > >> >> Jan > > > >> >> -- > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > > > >> > https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
