Hi all,
How's the progress? Where's JIRA I could follow?
We're building a Cordova-based framework and working closely to Cordova
daily bits. We're still keeping tests in each plugin repo, and manually sync
with Cordova-Mobile-Spec, that's even more painful after most of tests got
removed from plugin repos.
We added a little script to cli (a new command actually) to integrate tests
of all currently installed plugins into to target app, that's way how we
perform testing for now.
Need some advice, thanks.
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Michal Mocny"<mmo...@chromium.org>;
Date: Thu, Oct 31, 2013 11:35 PM
To: "dev"<dev@cordova.apache.org>;
Subject: Re: mobile-spec and releases: How do we test?
This is awesome progress, guys, thanks for the help.
I'm going to put all the bits together and compile a list of tasks left and
write-up instructions for those who have yet to take a look. If everyone
on the lists is still happy with the direction, I'll move those to JIRA.
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:08 AM, David Kemp <drk...@chromium.org> wrote:
> I converted the couchdb reporter to the 2.0 style and added it to the repo.
> It works(hard coded config), but still needs the configuration components
> completed and some final adjustments to the data.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I ported the contacts plugin [1] to the new style and I found the
> > process to be more or less straightforward. I also kept the eval in
> > there but there might be a better way ?
> >
> > [1] http://goo.gl/uhnwtz
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > > Sadly, we are approaching an in-between time of moving the mobile-spec
> > > tests out of the app and into plugins. We are still investigating the
> > best
> > > way to do this without disruption.
> > >
> > > For what its worth: several plugins now have a 'cdvtest' branch which
> > > supplies new-style tests ripped out of mobile-spec. If you are having
> > > issues cleaning up the old style tests, take a look at the new ones (or
> > try
> > > porting yourself).
> > >
> > > I'm going to write up a doc with the summary of the state of testing
> > within
> > > a day or so given the results of this week to make it easier for you
> (and
> > > others) to pick up.
> > >
> > > -Michal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Naik, Archana <na...@lab126.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Thanks Michal. You answered my questions.
> > >>
> > >> More to elaborate on my question: I am testing amazon-fireos
> > >> port(platform) with all plug-ins using mobile-spec. I am seeing some
> > >> failures in 3.1.0 version because of test cases timing out. I am
> pretty
> > new
> > >> to cordova and still in learning phase. :) I am trying to understand
> > these
> > >> failures. Interestingly they pass on 3.0.x version.
> > >>
> > >> Archana
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> From: Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>
> > >> Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 10:27 AM
> > >> To: "Naik, Archana" <na...@lab126.com>
> > >> Cc: "dev@cordova.apache.org" <dev@cordova.apache.org>, Michal Mocny <
> > >> mmo...@chromium.org>
> > >>
> > >> Subject: Re: mobile-spec and releases: How do we test?
> > >>
> > >> May you clarify?
> > >>
> > >> Right now, there is no formal way to test plugins, we are trying to
> > >> invent that way now. Check out cordova-labs repo's cdvtest branch
> for a
> > >> sample app & plugin to track progress.
> > >>
> > >> Jasmine is hosted in that sample app, but plugins will not directly
> > >> know/care. Any testing framework which is api-compatible should work.
> > In
> > >> practice, I'm not sure how compatible they all are, so it may very
> well
> > be
> > >> limited to jasmine -- but it does mean you can make local
> modifications
> > >> such as our CI is doing to create a custom test reporter.
> > >>
> > >> -Michal
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Naik, Archana <na...@lab126.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi, Guys
> > >>>
> > >>> While on this topic, I have a question: how do I test individual
> > plug-in?
> > >>> Where is the this jasmine version specified?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>> Archana
> > >>>
> > >>> On 10/30/13 7:26 AM, "Michal Mocny" <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> >Here are some links to jasmine-2 docs since its a hard time finding
> > them:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >http://jasmine.github.io/2.0/introduction.html
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> https://github.com/pivotal/jasmine/blob/master/release_notes/20rc5.md
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> >On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org
> >
> > >>> >wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Bryan Higgins
> > >>> >><br...@bryanhiggins.net>wrote:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>> I just converted geolocation to the new test style [1]
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> I'm happy with the process overall, and I find the jasmine 2
> tests
> > are
> > >>> >>> more
> > >>> >>> succinct.
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> There are a few things worth noting:
> > >>> >>> - I kept the eval code in. At google today, it was discussed that
> > this
> > >>> >>>may
> > >>> >>> not be the best approach.
> > >>> >>> - Jasmine 2: You must hit at least one expect statement or the
> test
> > >>> >>>will
> > >>> >>> timeout even though done was called.
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> We could file a bug (I ran into it during setup once too), but
> > really,
> > >>> >> what is the worth of a test if there are no expect clauses?
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>> - I did not remove the manual test page [2]. It would be great if
> > we
> > >>> >>>had a
> > >>> >>> convention for importing these. (ie test harness looks for a page
> > at
> > >>> >>> www/test/plugin-id.html and adds a link to it if it exists)
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> I'm going to work on a solution for this today. The thought is
> that
> > >>> the
> > >>> >> plugin has a single module that can define all auto/manual tests,
> > and
> > >>> >>the
> > >>> >> test-harness choses which to display where.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> [1]
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>>
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-plugin-geolocation.git
> > >>> >>>;a=commit;h=075850a460d8171a04809cf6317fb4c4ef998603
> > >>> >>> [2]
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>>
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-plugin-geolocation.git
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> >>>;a=blob;f=test/manual.html;h=6ec2eed03e18c2efaa8710094d60930bb32227ba;hb
> > >>> >>>=459a01c888801e8dfa2a688d25483bb48c46d8e2
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:50 PM, David Kemp <
> drk...@chromium.org>
> > >>> >>>wrote:
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> > In spite of that fact that it needs a tooling change, I like
> the
> > >>> >>>added
> > >>> >>> > <mode> tag / prepare steps.
> > >>> >>> > The tooling change should be small and it means no runtime
> > impact on
> > >>> >>> apps.
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> > I love the approach - a very positive step to cleaning up
> > testing.
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> > David Kemp
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Michal Mocny <
> > mmo...@chromium.org
> > >>> >
> > >>> >>> > wrote:
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> > > Braden, you're right, good catch.
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > Discussing locally how we could support "prepare --mode=..."
> in
> > >>> the
> > >>> >>> most
> > >>> >>> > > generalized form, we remembered an old suggestion to just
> > support
> > >>> >>> <mode>
> > >>> >>> > > tags.
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > The benefits seem to be:
> > >>> >>> > > - No need to add custom tag-prefix/attributes for the
> > combinations
> > >>> >>>of
> > >>> >>> > > js-module mode=, asset mode=, etc etc
> > >>> >>> > > - More visually apparent when reading a plugin.xml file, akin
> > to
> > >>> >>> > > <platforms> tag
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > The drawbacks seem to be:
> > >>> >>> > > - Not all descendant tags are easy to support for a given
> mode
> > >>> (ie,
> > >>> >>> > > <dependency>)
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > Summarizing the options currently discussed in this thread:
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > - new <js-test-module> tag. Not general enough solution to
> > >>> support
> > >>> >>> tests
> > >>> >>> > > bundling <assets>, so -1 from me for this reason.
> > >>> >>> > > - mode="..." attribute for a set of whitelisted tags
> > (<js-module>,
> > >>> >>> > <asset>,
> > >>> >>> > > ...)
> > >>> >>> > > - <mode name="..."> tag for a set of whitelisted descendant
> > >>> >>> > > tags (<js-module>, <asset>, ...)
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > The last two options are really functionally equivalent, but
> > given
> > >>> >>> that
> > >>> >>> > we
> > >>> >>> > > opted for <platform> tag instead of attribute, I'm also
> > favoring a
> > >>> >>> <mode>
> > >>> >>> > > tag.
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > -Michal
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Braden Shepherdson <
> > >>> >>> > bra...@chromium.org
> > >>> >>> > > >wrote:
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > > It's not true that adding these tests only creates larger
> > >>> >>>binaries.
> > >>> >>> > They
> > >>> >>> > > > will be fetched and parsed by the plugin loader code at app
> > >>> >>>startup
> > >>> >>> > time.
> > >>> >>> > > > It goes through the list of all plugins in
> cordova_plugins.js
> > >>> and
> > >>> >>> loads
> > >>> >>> > > > them all. That parses them, and runs the outermost layer,
> > which
> > >>> >>>is
> > >>> >>> the
> > >>> >>> > > > wrapping function function(require, module, exports) { ...
> > }. So
> > >>> >>> there
> > >>> >>> > is
> > >>> >>> > > > still runtime memory and CPU impact.
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > > I support <js-test-module> tags or <js-module ... test> or
> > >>> >>>whatever.
> > >>> >>> > > > Similarly, prepare for tests. I realize we want to avoid
> > tooling
> > >>> >>> > support,
> > >>> >>> > > > but I think tooling support is a lesser evil than
> production
> > >>> >>> > performance
> > >>> >>> > > > impact.
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > > Overall approach makes me happy.
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > > Braden
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Michal Mocny
> > >>> >>><mmo...@chromium.org>
> > >>> >>> > > wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Andrew Grieve <
> > >>> >>> agri...@chromium.org>
> > >>> >>> > > >> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> > The eval of the jasmine interface deserves mention. Is
> the
> > >>> >>> > motivation
> > >>> >>> > > >> > there that tests can choose to use another testing
> > framework?
> > >>> >>> That's
> > >>> >>> > > why
> > >>> >>> > > >> > you don't just make jasmine functions globals?
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> I was hoping the plugins would need to depend on anything
> > but
> > >>> >>> CDVTest,
> > >>> >>> > > and
> > >>> >>> > > >> not expect any globals. I guess, though, that CDVTest
> still
> > >>> >>> expects
> > >>> >>> > the
> > >>> >>> > > >> app to provide to a test framework and some other stuff,
> so
> > in
> > >>> >>>the
> > >>> >>> end
> > >>> >>> > > its
> > >>> >>> > > >> no different. I was hedging on being able to update
> > CDVTest in
> > >>> >>>the
> > >>> >>> > > future
> > >>> >>> > > >> for whatever we need, and all 3rdparty plugins would not
> > need
> > >>> >>> > updating.
> > >>> >>> > > >> eval() could be used to do all sorts of clever things if
> we
> > >>> >>> needed..
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> > One nit pick just from reading your email is that this
> > will
> > >>> >>>cause
> > >>> >>> > the
> > >>> >>> > > >> test
> > >>> >>> > > >> > js-modules to be injected into apps that use the
> plugins.
> > I
> > >>> >>>think
> > >>> >>> > > >> probably
> > >>> >>> > > >> > we will want to update the tools to recognize a
> > >>> >>> <js-test-module>. We
> > >>> >>> > > >> > *could* work around it by adding the tests to new
> plugins
> > >>> that
> > >>> >>> > depend
> > >>> >>> > > on
> > >>> >>> > > >> > the thing they are testing, but I think changing the
> tools
> > >>> >>>would
> > >>> >>> be
> > >>> >>> > > >> nicer.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> I also mentioned splitting tests into second plugin but
> > thats
> > >>> >>> overkill
> > >>> >>> > > >> except in extreme circumstances. Note that the tests
> aren't
> > >>> >>> actually
> > >>> >>> > > >> loaded unless you require them, so its just a matter of
> > larger
> > >>> >>> > binaries
> > >>> >>> > > >> which could be filtered out manually.
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> My person preference would be to support conditional build
> > >>> >>>types,
> > >>> >>> > which
> > >>> >>> > > >> have come up before. ie, cordova prepare debug, cordova
> > >>> prepare
> > >>> >>> > > release,
> > >>> >>> > > >> cordova prepare test -- and plugin.xml could specify a
> > >>> different
> > >>> >>> set
> > >>> >>> > of
> > >>> >>> > > >> js-module for either.
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> A specific <js-test-module> would be fine, but isnt "0 new
> > >>> >>> tooling".
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> Also, I forgot to mention, but we do need to add support
> for
> > >>> >>> getting
> > >>> >>> > the
> > >>> >>> > > >> full list of plugins installed, which should be trivial to
> > add
> > >>> >>>to
> > >>> >>> > > >> modulemapper (maybe there is already a way to reach in,
> > but I
> > >>> >>> don't
> > >>> >>> > > think
> > >>> >>> > > >> we have a documented api for it).
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> > Another nit is that it would be nice if the CordovaTests
> > app
> > >>> >>> didn't
> > >>> >>> > > >> depend
> > >>> >>> > > >> > on any plugins. e.g., don't have it depend on device
> > plugin.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> CordovaTests doesn't explicitly depend on device plugin,
> > except
> > >>> >>> that
> > >>> >>> > at
> > >>> >>> > > >> the
> > >>> >>> > > >> moment I have it printing the same info that MobileSpec
> > does at
> > >>> >>> > startup.
> > >>> >>> > > >> This could be wrapped in a try{}catch in case the require
> > >>> >>>fails,
> > >>> >>> but
> > >>> >>> > > its
> > >>> >>> > > >> good info to have in the common case.
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> > Overall, really like the approach!
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> Thanks!
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Michal Mocny <
> > >>> >>> mmo...@chromium.org>
> > >>> >>> > > >> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> TLDR; I've implemented a plugin testing strategy that
> > >>> >>>requires 0
> > >>> >>> > new
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> tooling features, can support non-core plugins, and
> > >>> hopefully
> > >>> >>> even
> > >>> >>> > > >> support
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> a variety of methods for running/reporting the test
> > results.
> > >>> >>> Super
> > >>> >>> > > >> alpha
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> preview, but take a look if you like the direction!
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> NEW: CDVTest Plugin: https://github.com/mmocny/CDVTest
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> NEW: CordovaTest App:
> > >>> https://github.com/mmocny/CordovaTests
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> UPDATED: Converted three existing plugins to this "new
> > >>> >>>style".
> > >>> >>> > Code
> > >>> >>> > > >> is on
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> feature branches of respective repos (cdvtest branch):
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> org.apache.cordova.device
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> org.apache.cordova.device-motion
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> org.chromium.storage
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> (must clone locally, switch to branch, and plugin add
> > from
> > >>> >>>local
> > >>> >>> > > path)
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> Now, any plugin that wants to join in on the fun needs
> to
> > >>> >>> provide a
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> <js-module
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> src="..." name="test" /> and use this template:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> exports.init = function() {
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> >>>eval(require('org.apache.cordova.test.test').injectJasmineInterface(this
> > >>> >>>,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> 'this'));
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> // TESTS GO HERE
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> describe(..., function() {
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> it(...);
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> });
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> };
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> (The eval is optional but super useful; it will inject
> > the
> > >>> >>> jasmine
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> interface into your scope, so you don't have to type
> > >>> >>> > > jasmine.describe,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> jasmine.it, etc. Not sure of any cleaner way to do
> > this.)
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> STEPS:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> 1. create a new cordova project
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> 2. import the CordovaTest app into your www
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> 3. add any or all of the above plugins
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> 4. give it a run, and try out the auto tests (all pass
> on
> > >>> >>>ipad,
> > >>> >>> > some
> > >>> >>> > > >> still
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> fail on android)
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> Lots of work left to do, but hopefully good enough to
> > whet
> > >>> >>>your
> > >>> >>> > > >> appetite.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> One thing to note, I've attempted to make CDVTest and
> > plugin
> > >>> >>> tests
> > >>> >>> > > >> unaware
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> of the specific jasmine version the app is hosting (so
> > that
> > >>> >>>it
> > >>> >>> can
> > >>> >>> > be
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> swapped without changing all plugins), but it must
> > support
> > >>> >>>the
> > >>> >>> new
> > >>> >>> > > >> style
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> interface for async tests (ie, accept a done callback).
> > >>> >>>This is
> > >>> >>> > the
> > >>> >>> > > >> style
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> that node-jasmine uses, mocha uses, and jasmine-2.0 is
> > going
> > >>> >>>to
> > >>> >>> use
> > >>> >>> > > >> (I'm
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> using jasmine 2.0 rc3). This means that core plugin
> > tests
> > >>> >>> require
> > >>> >>> > > some
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> code transformations, but the net effect is cleaner
> tests
> > >>> and
> > >>> >>> more
> > >>> >>> > > >> common
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> style with our node tools' tests.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> Manual tests are not implemented yet.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> -Michal
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Michal Mocny <
> > >>> >>> > mmo...@chromium.org>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> > I'm throwing something together right now, actually.
> > I'll
> > >>> >>> post
> > >>> >>> > my
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> current
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> > progress today so you can take a look.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Brian LeRoux <
> > >>> b...@brian.io>
> > >>> >>> > wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> Sorry keep meaning to respond. I like Michal's first
> > step
> > >>> >>>but
> > >>> >>> > > >> growing
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> to a
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> full suite of tools. Are you currently tackling this
> > >>> >>>Braden?
> > >>> >>> I
> > >>> >>> > > feel
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> like
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> it
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> is related to the Medic stuff and maybe we should
> > throw
> > >>> >>>one
> > >>> >>> of
> > >>> >>> > our
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> guys on
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> the problem fully.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> On Sep 27, 2013 5:10 PM, "Braden Shepherdson" <
> > >>> >>> > > bra...@chromium.org>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > Which one?
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Brian LeRoux
> > >>> >>><b...@brian.io
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > I really like your proposal as a starting point.
> > Very
> > >>> >>> simple
> > >>> >>> > > but
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> would
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > allow for in-app testing as well as on the cmd
> > line
> > >>> if
> > >>> >>> we so
> > >>> >>> > > >> wish.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Michal Mocny <
> > >>> >>> > > >> mmo...@chromium.org
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > I was looking over some old emails from this
> > list
> > >>> on
> > >>> >>> > plugin
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> testing,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > an
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > idea that was proposed way back was to ship
> > plugin
> > >>> >>> tests
> > >>> >>> > as
> > >>> >>> > > a
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> second
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > plugin. That way, you can chose to install
> > tests,
> > >>> >>>or
> > >>> >>> not,
> > >>> >>> > > and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> know
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > explicitly if they are being copied into your
> > final
> > >>> >>> > project.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > An alternative would be to support build
> > targets a
> > >>> >>>la
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> "release/debug"
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > have target-specific plugin.xml tags (assets,
> > >>> >>> js-modules,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > source-file..).
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > -Michal
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Brian LeRoux
> <
> > >>> >>> b...@brian.io
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > I think this is basically what we've been
> > >>> >>>proposing
> > >>> >>> for
> > >>> >>> > a
> > >>> >>> > > >> while
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> now.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Michal
> Mocny
> > <
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> mmo...@chromium.org>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > I would suggest perhaps a simpler
> approach,
> > >>> >>>which
> > >>> >>> > > doesn't
> > >>> >>> > > >> add
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > anything
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > new
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > to cordova-cli/plugman:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - Each plugin ships with a "tests"
> > js-module,
> > >>> >>>and
> > >>> >>> we
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> document a
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > convention
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > of where they should live, and what
> > signature
> > >>> it
> > >>> >>> > should
> > >>> >>> > > >> have
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> (i.e.,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>>cordova.require('plugin.name.Tests').forEach(...)
> > >>> >>> ).
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - Will need a common way to
> > describe/report
> > >>> >>> results
> > >>> >>> > > >> (others
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> have
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > mentioned TAP).
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - Any app is free to run those plugin
> tests
> > in
> > >>> >>>any
> > >>> >>> > which
> > >>> >>> > > >> way,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> but
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > we
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > ship a
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > mobile-spec app which is one opinionated
> > way to
> > >>> >>>do
> > >>> >>> so.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - It attempts to require the test module
> > for
> > >>> >>>each
> > >>> >>> > > >> installed
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > plugin,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > runs
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > them, and aggregates results.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - It could report results to some shared
> > >>> >>>server,
> > >>> >>> > allow
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> toggling
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > of
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > tests,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > etc, but no plugin should know or care
> about
> > >>> >>>those
> > >>> >>> > > >> features.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > Using that as a generic base:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - We ship a "CDVTests" (or whatever)
> plugin
> > >>> >>>which
> > >>> >>> has
> > >>> >>> > a
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> bunch of
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > library
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > code for creating tests, and plugins can
> > use it
> > >>> >>>to
> > >>> >>> > > >> register
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> their
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > tests.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - This makes it easier to register manual
> > tests
> > >>> >>>in
> > >>> >>> a
> > >>> >>> > > >> common
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> format
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > for
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > core
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > plugins, and prevents code duplication for
> > core
> > >>> >>> auto
> > >>> >>> > > >> tests.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > - External plugins can chose to use our
> > testing
> > >>> >>> > library,
> > >>> >>> > > >> or
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> not.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > -Michal
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Braden
> > >>> >>> Shepherdson <
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > bra...@chromium.org
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > Here's an off-the-top-of-my-head sketch
> of
> > >>> >>>how we
> > >>> >>> > > might
> > >>> >>> > > >> do
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > Voltron
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > tests:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > - Add a tag to plugin.xml that names
> each
> > >>> test
> > >>> >>> file:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > <test type="automatic"
> > src="spec/foo.js"
> > >>> >>> > name="Foo
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> Automated"
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > />
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > <test type="manual"
> src="spec/bar.js"
> > >>> >>> name="Foo
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> Manual" />
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > - Add a new command, cordova test (maybe
> > >>> >>> > > prepare-test),
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> that:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > - Ignores the top-level www.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > - Instead copies in a basic testing
> > >>> >>> index.html
> > >>> >>> > > >> similar
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> to
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> the
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > current
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > mobile-spec's
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > - That index reads a file akin to
> > >>> >>> > > cordova_plugins.js
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > (cordova_tests.js,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > maybe?) generated by the CLI, containing
> > the
> > >>> >>>info
> > >>> >>> > from
> > >>> >>> > > >> the
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> <test>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > tags.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > - It has navigation similar to the
> > >>> current
> > >>> >>> > > >> mobile-spec,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> with
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > buttons
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > for the automatic and manual sections.
> > Auto
> > >>> >>>has
> > >>> >>> > "All"
> > >>> >>> > > >> and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> then
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > each
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > module,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > manual just has the list of modules.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > Braden
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:33 AM, Carlos
> > >>> >>>Santana <
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > csantan...@gmail.com
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > I like the idea can we call mobilespec
> > now
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> cordova-voltron
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > be
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > DRY
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > use the tests form the plugins.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > Voltron by itself creates an App that
> > tests
> > >>> >>> only
> > >>> >>> > > core,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> but
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> as
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > you
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > use plugman to add plugins to voltron
> it
> > >>> has
> > >>> >>> more
> > >>> >>> > > test
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> cases.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > It would not be a bad idea to enhance
> > >>> >>> plugin.xml
> > >>> >>> > in
> > >>> >>> > > >> the
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> future
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > to
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > include
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > information about testing (i.e.
> > Directory
> > >>> >>> > containing
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> tests
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > files,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > test
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > command, etc..)
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > --Carlos
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > On Thursday, September 26, 2013, Anis
> > KADRI
> > >>> >>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > What's the challenge of having us
> use
> > the
> > >>> >>> tests
> > >>> >>> > > that
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> come
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > with
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > the
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > individual plugins ?
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:13 AM,
> David
> > >>> >>>Kemp <
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > drk...@google.com
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > Currently, the automated test
> system
> > >>> >>>that
> > >>> >>> we
> > >>> >>> > > have
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> running
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > (derived
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > from
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > Medic) uses only the mobilespec
> > tests.
> > >>> >>>It
> > >>> >>> does
> > >>> >>> > > not
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> yet
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> use
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > tests
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > collected
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > from the plugins. Its been talked
> > >>> about,
> > >>> >>> but
> > >>> >>> > not
> > >>> >>> > > >> gone
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > anywhere.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > David Kemp
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 7:58 PM,
> > Jesse
> > >>> <
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > purplecabb...@gmail.com
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Yeah, I have pushed some changes
> to
> > >>> >>> > > mobile-spec,
> > >>> >>> > > >> and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> when
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > I
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > did
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > I
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > also
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> copied the tests into the plugin
> > >>> >>>involved.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Until we get the magic test
> runner
> > >>> >>> > happening, I
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> think
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> we
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > just
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > keep
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> duplicating.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> @purplecabbage
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> risingj.com
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:38 PM,
> > >>> Steven
> > >>> >>> Gill
> > >>> >>> > <
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > stevengil...@gmail.com
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > <javascript:;>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > We copied over tests into
> plugins
> > >>> >>>when
> > >>> >>> we
> > >>> >>> > > first
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> broke
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > them
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > out,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > but
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > I
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> don't
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > believe they have been updated.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > I would say for now to just add
> > the
> > >>> >>> tests
> > >>> >>> > to
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> mobile
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > spec,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > possibly in
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > the future we go all voltron to
> > >>> build
> > >>> >>> > mobile
> > >>> >>> > > >> spec
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> and
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > keep
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > tests
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > with
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> their
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > corresponding plugins.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:22
> PM,
> > Joe
> > >>> >>> > Bowser <
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > bows...@gmail.com
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > <javascript:;>>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > Hey
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > Right now, I'm working on a
> > weird
> > >>> >>>file
> > >>> >>> > > issue
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> that
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > requires
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > me
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > to
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > update mobile-spec, but I'm
> > >>> >>>wondering
> > >>> >>> > where
> > >>> >>> > > >> the
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> tests
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > should
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > live.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > Should it all keep living in
> > >>> >>> mobile-spec,
> > >>> >>> > > or
> > >>> >>> > > >> is
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> it
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > with
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > the
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > plugins.
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > And if it's with the plugins,
> > will
> > >>> >>> there
> > >>> >>> > be
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> scripts to
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > assemble
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > mobile-spec all Voltron
> style?
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > This came up earlier, but I
> > >>> haven't
> > >>> >>> found
> > >>> >>> > > any
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> fix
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> that
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > needed
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > a
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > mobile-spec test. (Many that
> > need
> > >>> >>> native
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> testing,
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > like
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > recursive
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > file
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > copy, etc). Any thoughts?
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > Joe
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > --
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > Carlos Santana
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > <csantan...@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> > >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >>
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >> >
> > >>> >>> > > >>
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > > >
> > >>> >>> > >
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>
