I actually meant my prior reply to be a part of the thread regarding StandardAnalyzer. Sorry! I will reply to the other thread for posterity's sake.
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Doug Sale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There must be some significant difference between your testing framework > and that employed by George and I (we've both seen the error). > > Are we standardized on a particular version of NUnit? What about compiler > and compiler flags - do we have / do we need to standardize? > > > > On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi Doug, >> >> >> >> My current state: >> >> >> >> after applying the simple patches >> >> BooleanScorer2-digy.patch(LUCENENET-128) & >> SupportClass.patch(LUCENENET-135) >> >> to head revision of SVN >> >> >> >> Failing Tests are >> >> >> >> 1- Index: >> >> TestDiverseDocs >> >> TestIOExceptionDuringAbort >> >> TestIOExceptionDuringAbortOnlyOnce >> >> TestStressIndexing (sometimes?) >> >> TestStressIndexing2(both 2 tests) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2-Search: (after applying LUCENENET-139 patch related with remoting) >> >> Function/TestCustomScoreQuery.TestCustomScoreFloat >> >> Function/TestCustomScoreQuery.TestCustomScoreShort >> >> Spans/TestSpan.TestSpanNearOrdered02 >> >> Spans/TestSpan.TestSpanNearOrdered03 >> >> Spans/TestSpan.TestSpanNearOrdered04 >> >> Spans/TestSpan.TestSpanNearOrdered05 >> >> TestDisjunctionMaxQuery.TestBooleanOptionalWithTiebreaker >> (see LUCENENET-95) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> DIGY >> >> >> >> From: Doug Sale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 12:59 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: outstanding issues in SVN head >> >> >> >> Find attached a listing of outstanding issues in the head revision of the >> Lucene.Net SVN repo. The document has one source file per line and the >> fields are tab-delimited. There are column-heading lines for each name >> space (e.g., Lucene.Net.Index.Store). The fields are as follows: test >> class; num tests passed, num tests failed, num tests not run, flag (any >> failures or not run), name/method of failed tests, notes. Additionally, >> at >> the bottom of the document are some totals. >> >> This list does not reflect any pending patches. It does contain a notes >> field that might contain salient details (e.g., all the test failures that >> are dependent on a BooleanScorer2 fix). >> >> Digy, George, any others actively developing - please take a look and >> verify >> that this is your view of the current state. I will be using this as a >> guide to focus my efforts and will update the status as fixes are >> committed. >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >
