I opened a PR - https://github.com/apache/spark-website/pull/232
2019년 11월 19일 (화) 오전 9:22, Hyukjin Kwon 님이 작성:
> Let me document as below in few days:
>
> 1. For Python and Java, write a single comment that starts with JIRA ID
> and short description, e.g. (SPARK-X: test blah blah)
> 2. For
Let me document as below in few days:
1. For Python and Java, write a single comment that starts with JIRA ID and
short description, e.g. (SPARK-X: test blah blah)
2. For R, use JIRA ID as a prefix for its test name.
assuming everybody is happy.
2019년 11월 18일 (월) 오전 11:36, Hyukjin Kwon 님이
Actually there are not so many Java test cases in Spark (because Scala runs
on JVM as everybody knows)[1].
Given that, I think we can avoid to put some efforts on this for now .. I
don't mind if somebody wants to give a shot since it looks good anyway but
to me I wouldn't spend so much time on
Test reporters do often contain some assumptions about the characters in
the test methods. Historically JUnit XML reporters have never sanitised the
method names so XML injection attacks have been fairly trivial. Haven't
tried this for a while.
That whole JUnit XML report "standard" was actually
DisplayName looks good in general but actually here I would like first to
find a existing pattern to document in guidelines given the actual existing
practice we all are used to. I'm trying to be very conservative since this
guidelines affect everybody.
I think it might be better to discuss
Junit5: Display names.
Goes all the way to the XML.
https://junit.org/junit5/docs/current/user-guide/#writing-tests-display-names
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 6:13 PM Shixiong(Ryan) Zhu
wrote:
> Should we also add a guideline for non Scala tests? Other languages (Java,
> Python, R) don't support
this is about test description and not test file name right?
if yes I don’t see a problem.
From: Hyukjin Kwon
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2019 6:03:02 PM
To: Shixiong(Ryan) Zhu
Cc: dev ; Felix Cheung ;
Shivaram Venkataraman
Subject: Re: Adding JIRA ID as the
Yeah, sounds good to have it.
In case of R, it seems not quite common to write down JIRA ID [1] but looks
some have the prefix in its test name in general.
In case of Python and Java, seems we time to time write a JIRA ID in the
comment right under the test method [2][3].
Given this pattern, I
Should we also add a guideline for non Scala tests? Other languages (Java,
Python, R) don't support using string as a test name.
Best Regards,
Ryan
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:04 AM Hyukjin Kwon wrote:
> I opened a PR - https://github.com/apache/spark-website/pull/231
>
> 2019년 11월 13일 (수) 오전
I opened a PR - https://github.com/apache/spark-website/pull/231
2019년 11월 13일 (수) 오전 10:43, Hyukjin Kwon 님이 작성:
> > In general a test should be self descriptive and I don't think we should
> be adding JIRA ticket references wholesale. Any action that the reader has
> to take to understand why a
> In general a test should be self descriptive and I don't think we should
be adding JIRA ticket references wholesale. Any action that the reader has
to take to understand why a test was introduced is one too many. However in
some cases the thing we are trying to test is very subtle and in that
Let's suggest "SPARK-12345:" but not go back and change a bunch of test cases.
I'd add this only when a test specifically targets a certain issue.
It's a nice-to-have, not super essential, just because in the rare
case you need to understand why a test asserts something, you can go
back and find
+1
Two confusions to clarify:
1. what if multiple JIRA IDs relating to the same test? we just take the
very first JIRA ID?
2. are we going to have a full scan of all existing tests and attach a JIRA
ID to it?
Thank you Hyukjin :)
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 1:47 PM Dongjoon Hyun
wrote:
> Thank
Thank you for the suggestion, Hyukjin.
Previously, we added Jira IDs for the bug fix PR test cases as Gabor said.
For the new features (and improvements), we didn't add them
because all test cases in the newly added test suite share the same prefix
JIRA ID in that case.
It might looks
+1 for having that consistent rule in test names.
+1 for making it a guideline.
+1 defining exact guides in general.
Until now I've followed the alternative (only add the prefix when the
JIRA's type is bug) and that way I knew that such tests contain edge cases.
In case of new features I'm pretty
In few days, I will wrote this in our guidelines probably after rewording
it a bit better:
1. Add a prefix into a test name when a PR adds a couple of tests.
2. Uses "SPARK-: test name" format.
Please let me know if you have any different opinion about what/when to
write the JIRA ID as the
+1 for making it a guideline. This is helpful when the test cases are moved
to a different file.
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 3:23 PM Takeshi Yamamuro
wrote:
> +1 for having that consistent rule in test names.
> This is a trivial problem though, I think documenting this rule in the
> contribution
+1 for having that consistent rule in test names.
This is a trivial problem though, I think documenting this rule in the
contribution guide
might be able to make reviewer overhead a little smaller.
Bests,
Takeshi
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 1:46 AM Hyukjin Kwon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Maybe it's not
Hi all,
Maybe it's not a big deal but it brought some confusions time to time into
Spark dev and community. I think it's time to discuss about when/which
format to add a JIRA ID as a prefix for the test case name in Scala test
cases.
Currently we have many test case names with prefixes as below:
19 matches
Mail list logo
