On Mar 21, 2010, at 4:00 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:

> 
> On 20 Mar 2010, at 20:06, Paul Davis wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@me.com> wrote:
>>> I think faulty test case should block the release, if I am to have any
>>> future sanity preparing releases. I don't want to delay and longer, so if
>>> you guys are absolutely sure this is a test error and not code error, then I
>>> propose that the test be commented out. Our tests form a contract between
>>> us, internally, and our users. If that contract has a bug, it should be
>>> removed or fixed - or it simply dilutes the importance of contract. If some
>>> one comments out the test, and we agree it is not indicative of an important
>>> bug, I can call the vote within hours.
>>> 
>> 
>> I'd have to agree on this. From the point of view of a release, if a
>> test reports a failure then it should be made to not report a failure.
>> If that's accomplished by disabling it, then there will be a commit
>> with a message that explains why it was disabled and etc and such on
>> and so forth.
> 
> I'd do that if the test was failing for me :)

it's not failing for you when you run changes.js with the CLI ?  Fails for me 
every time. 

Anyway I poked at this a bit yesterday and am not 100% sure the issue is in the 
test. I tried putting a sleep in with no luck. If my understanding of the JS is 
correct, CouchDB is supposed to be synchronous so it's not timing.

If someone could comment on the test itself it would be helpful. The section of 
the code that fails:

// changes get all_docs style with deleted docs
  var doc = {a:1};
  db.save(doc);
  db.deleteDoc(doc);
  var req = CouchDB.request("GET", 
    "/test_suite_db/_changes?filter=changes_filter/bop&style=all_docs");
  var resp = JSON.parse(req.responseText);
  TEquals(3, resp.results.length, "should return matching rows");


seems odd to me. all_docs as I read the code will return docs with deletes and 
conflicts but in this call the filter bop will not apply to the doc {a:1} so 
I'm not sure what this delete prior to the call is about. Anyway I can make it 
fail in the debugger so perhaps I can find the root cause.




> 
> Cheers
> Jan
> --
> 

Reply via email to