Hi Jonathan,
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 09:59:13AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> >> In the short term, we can run tests internally to check that Git keeps
> >> following the schema. Let's not block patches 1 and 2 by this ---
On Sat, Aug 03, 2019 at 09:35:49AM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> - Limit it to 'git/git's 'pu' branch, so others can have their own
> 'pu' branch without suffering from the consequences.
> It seems easy to do so, on Travis CI these are available in the
> TRAVIS_BRANCH and TRAVIS_REPO_S
On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 04:06:50PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 06:52:47PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> >> Gábor, if we introduce such a parameter, do you think it would make
> >> sense for us to set up a worker that passes it?
> >
> > That w
SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 09:59:13AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> In the short term, we can run tests internally to check that Git keeps
>> following the schema. Let's not block patches 1 and 2 by this ---
>
> To my understanding patch 2 is only a proof of concept: it star
SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 06:52:47PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Gábor, if we introduce such a parameter, do you think it would make
>> sense for us to set up a worker that passes it?
>
> That would be even worse than the current approach of the third patch,
> because the
On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 09:59:13AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> The exhaustive approach really helps. Arguing against it kind of
> feels like saying "leak checkers are great, but why run one on the
> full test suite instead of a dedicated tool that exercises the code
> paths where you expect to
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 06:52:47PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> What do you think of making the validation disabled by default and
> using a parameter (see "Running tests with special setups" in
> t/README) to turn it on? That way, it should be okay for it to take
> 10 minutes because this woul
Hi,
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2019, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> What do you think of making the validation disabled by default and
>> using a parameter (see "Running tests with special setups" in
>> t/README) to turn it on? That way, it should be okay for it to take
>> 10 minutes
Hi Jonathan & Josh,
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Josh Steadmon wrote:
> > On 2019.07.26 15:03, Josh Steadmon wrote:
>
> >> [ajv-cli] can validate the full 1.7M line trace output in just over a
> >> minute. Moreover, it has helpful output when validation fails. So I
> >> would be h
Josh Steadmon wrote:
> On 2019.07.26 15:03, Josh Steadmon wrote:
>> [ajv-cli] can validate the full 1.7M line trace output in just over a
>> minute. Moreover, it has helpful output when validation fails. So I
>> would be happy to re-implement this using ajv-cli.
>
> Unfortunately, ajv on Travis is
On 2019.07.26 15:03, Josh Steadmon wrote:
[snip]
> [ajv-cli] can validate the full 1.7M line trace output in just over a
> minute. Moreover, it has helpful output when validation fails. So I
> would be happy to re-implement this using ajv-cli.
Unfortunately, ajv on Travis is much slower than on my
Hi Gábor,
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:12:39PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > Besides, I have to admit that I am quite disheartened to see these lines
> > in the log:
> >
> > -- snip --
> > 2019/07/26 11:39:28 Validated items: 0
> > 2019/07/26 11:
On 2019.07.26 14:12, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:06:50PM -0700, Josh Steadmon wrote:
> >
> > > 3: acf3aebcaa ! 3: a07458b2e4 ci: run trace2 schema validation in the
> > > CI suite
> > > @@ ci/run-build-and-t
On 2019.07.25 09:14, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> SZEDER Gábor writes:
>
> >> I would appreciate any feedback on better ways to integrate the
> >> validator into the CI suite.
> >
> > How about adding a test script dedicated to JSON schema validation,
> > which runs only as many git commands as needed
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:12:39PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> I was wary about this patch series ever since I got aware that it
> refuses to use an already-available JSON schema validator (such as
> `ajv`, a seemingly well-established all-purpose validator that even
> claims to be the fast
Hi,
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:06:50PM -0700, Josh Steadmon wrote:
>
> > 3: acf3aebcaa ! 3: a07458b2e4 ci: run trace2 schema validation in the CI
> > suite
> > @@ ci/run-build-and-tests.sh: then
> > make test
> > + t/trace_sc
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:06:50PM -0700, Josh Steadmon wrote:
> Changes since V2 of this series:
> * corrected commit message regarding the different schema variations
> * cleaned up the Makefile
> * added comment noting that the validator expects JSON-Lines input
> * added a --progress flag to th
SZEDER Gábor writes:
>> I would appreciate any feedback on better ways to integrate the
>> validator into the CI suite.
>
> How about adding a test script dedicated to JSON schema validation,
> which runs only as many git commands as needed to cover all trace2
> events.
Sensible, but might be ha
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:06:50PM -0700, Josh Steadmon wrote:
> This is a proof of concept series that formalizes the structure of trace2
> event
> output using JSON-Schema [1].
>
> It provides a validator (written in Go) that verifies the events in a given
> trace2 event output file match the s
This is a proof of concept series that formalizes the structure of trace2 event
output using JSON-Schema [1].
It provides a validator (written in Go) that verifies the events in a given
trace2 event output file match the schema. I am happy to rewrite this validator
in some other language, provided
20 matches
Mail list logo
