Hi, Thanks for the fixes and the "stress" documents, I added a few more and added a test for the normal unit-tests to trigger those documents, otherwise the ooxml-schema-lite does not contain them as far as I saw.
Next regression-run is underway... Dominik. On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 8:25 PM Andreas Beeker <[email protected]> wrote: > HI, > > I've mentioned it in our private slack group *) - there's also an ant > error, which ignores quite a few *$Factory.class-es in packing the lite jar. > I'm currently trying to figure out how I can workaround this. > > > Another potential approach: ... > This was my first approach class -> xsb, but it was not reliable therefore > I've spent some time to find out (the few lines) of byte-buddy code. > So those .xsb are the ones we use in our test. if we do b) those should be > picked up. > > Andi > > *) this is just a participation reminder for the rest - I'm happy to > invite you if you tell me your asf slack id ;) > > On 30.12.20 20:04, Dominik Stadler wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'd go for b), hopefully not too many are necessary, it seems a simple > test > > which reads in the document triggers the necesary parts in most of the > > cases. > > > > c) would mean anybody out there with such a file would now get > > regression-errors unless he switches to the full file. > > > > Another potential approach: I don't know much about how you do all this > > agent-stuff nowadays, but is there a way to match the classes to the xsb > to > > find those missing ones as we seem to cover the classes themselves > already > > as they are only included when used in tests. > > > > Dominik. > > > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 7:09 PM Andreas Beeker <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Hi Dominik, > >> > >> thank you for running the regression test. > >> > >>> * Most of these are because the "lite" ooxml-schema jar is still > missing > >>> some stuff, not sure if the new way of building the lite-jar is the > cause > >>> or if we now use more parts in the regression tests > >> The lite jar used to contain all *.xsb files and now it will only > contains > >> the ones used in the tests, which decreased its size by around 40%. > >> > >> Should we ... ? > >> a) rollback the change and include all *.xsbs - the class files might be > >> still missing > >> b) provide unit tests for the failing files - we might need a few > >> roundtrips to fix those cases, i.e. best would be a reduced file list of > >> those failures > >> c) use the full schema for the regression tests > >> > >> Andi > >> > >> > >> On 30.12.20 17:37, Dominik Stadler wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> In order to get the release-preparations rolling a bit, I have > finished a > >>> first run of the "mass regression test" exercise. > >>> > >>> As usual it brings up cases where documents fail now, but did work fine > >>> previously, i.e. regressions that we may have introduced since the > >> previous > >>> release. > >>> > >>> I now process 3,356,984 documents (460k of those are skipped because > they > >>> are duplicates), currently there are around 3800 documents which show a > >>> regression: > >>> * Most of these are because the "lite" ooxml-schema jar is still > missing > >>> some stuff, not sure if the new way of building the lite-jar is the > cause > >>> or if we now use more parts in the regression tests > >>> * some exceptions/NPEs probably related to more support for > >>> drawing/rendering PPT(X) and so some may in fact be simply new > "expected" > >>> exceptions for broken documents > >>> * Note: The ones with TIMEOUT or OLDFORMAT are not regressions > >>> > >>> 5.0.0 vs. 4.1.2: > >>> > >> > http://people.apache.org/~centic/poi_regression/reports/index412RC3to500RC1.html > >>> 5.0.0 overall errors: > >>> > >> > http://people.apache.org/~centic/poi_regression/reportsAll/index412RC3to500RC1.html > >>> I can fairly easily re-run this as soon as we have fixes for some of > the > >>> things. > >>> > >>> Thanks... Dominik. > >>> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
