On Friday, November 8, 2013, Matthew Flatt wrote: > At Fri, 8 Nov 2013 19:18:10 -0600, Robby Findler wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Matthew Flatt > > <mfl...@cs.utah.edu<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > > > Yes. Even if (as in the future) the current ring-0 packages weren't all > > > the same git repository, I'd certainly at least try building them with > > > this change. > > > > > > I think that running all the tests in the same way that DrDr does is > > > not yet easy, but I hope we're moving in the direction of making that > > > easier, and then my process can improve. > > > > > > > > Well, if you've built them, then can't just you just run "raco test -xp > > <put package names here>" and come back in a bit? > > I encounter two problems with that strategy: > > * figuring out which of the 200+ package names to write; and > > * many things fail immediately and most things are skipped, because > `raco test` doesn't use the test customizations in "props" the way > DrDr does. > > I would like to say `raco test -p main-distribution` to get essentially > DrDr's results on my machine. > > That sounds nice.
> > > For now: I build, run some tests, and then push --- hoping that I can > > > fix or revert quickly when DrDr uncovers problems. > > > > > > > > Perhaps we should be thinking about generalizing the ring-0-based DrDr so > > we can ask to try out changes? > > Yes, it would be great if you work on that. I think the way forward is > to split out "props" information into "info.rkt" files, but I haven't > had time to pursue that direction myself. > > That sounds like a better approach. It also seems likely to mesh better with the snapshot infrastructure you've built. I would like to try that but I don't think I will get to it for several weeks, so if someone else wanted to give it a try that'd be fantastic. Robby
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev