On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 11:38:19 GMT, Christoph Langer <clan...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> As for the test, I had a closer look now and I find it hard to separate > testing of [JDK-8314063](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8314063) from > [JDK-8325579](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325579). Furthermore, most > of the entries test things that hadn't been addressed by any of these two > bugs at all. > > So, [JDK-8314063](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8314063) is only tested > in lines 72, 73, 76 and 77 The original problem of this issue > [JDK-8325579](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325579) is touched in line > 71 and 73. > > That means, most of the other test invocations test some generic behavior > which was never erroneous so far. Thanks for exploring the possibility of improving tracebility of test invocations to reported bugs. > I could, however, give each line its own test id and annotate the bugs > accordingly. Do you think that makes sense? It does make sense, but I'm not sure how such annotations will look like and if it will be easy to use them for debugging failures. I will leave the final decision to you here. Your last message with linkage of test invocations to bug id is already a good information to have. > I drafted a CSR. @AlekseiEfimov, would be nice if you could review it. Thanks for drafting a CSR. I will review it in comming days. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17797#issuecomment-1961537850
