Makes sense. Thanks. Commited as r5275 On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Freeland Abbott <fabb...@google.com>wrote:
> But now we're running them twice. > I'll give you the LGTM as testing is good, but I'm a bit worried for the > time penalty. But if it's a problem, we can fall back to the other approach > when it's clear it's a problem. > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Amit Manjhi <amitman...@google.com>wrote: > >> It just requires emma.jar which is pulled in from the tools dir. The time >> is basically the same as running hosted mode user tests. >> >> Amit >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Freeland Abbott <fabb...@google.com>wrote: >> >>> Well, that will run emma tests for everyone everywhere who does "ant >>> test"... >>> Does it require anything in particular to work, which people might not >>> have installed? And is the time significant? >>> >>> We can easily enough tweak the continuous builder configuration to >>> explicitly run the emma tests, if either of those questions gets a bad >>> answer. If they're both good, then maybe it's reasonable for all users to >>> run all tests (with the caveat that non-local web tests also need properties >>> set, or they become no-ops...) >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Amit Manjhi <amitman...@google.com>wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Freeland, >>>> >>>> The patch makes the emma tests run as part of our continuous build. The >>>> tests basically run all tests in user, except where sun's and openjdk's >>>> javac are broken, with emma.jar on the classpath. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Amit >>>> >>> >>> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
