Re: cvs commit: httpd-test/perl-framework/t/apache errordoc.t
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 05:03:50PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- errordoc.t 12 Jul 2004 16:44:47 - 1.2
+++ errordoc.t 12 Jul 2004 17:03:49 - 1.3
@@ -59,8 +59,7 @@
'/redefine/notfound.html code');
# 1.3 requires quotes for hard-coded messages
-my $expected = have_min_apache_version('2.1') ? qr/Not Found/ :
- have_apache(2) ? 'default' :
+my $expected = have_apache(2) ? qr/Not Found/ :
qr/Additionally, a 500/;
This makes the test fail against 2.0.50, but it's just a lack-of-feature
right, so OK if I half-revert this?
--- t/apache/errordoc.t 12 Jul 2004 17:03:49 - 1.3
+++ t/apache/errordoc.t 16 Jul 2004 12:16:25 -
@@ -59,7 +59,8 @@
'/redefine/notfound.html code');
# 1.3 requires quotes for hard-coded messages
-my $expected = have_apache(2) ? qr/Not Found/ :
+my $expected = have_min_apache_version('2.0.51') ? qr/Not Found/ :
+ have_apache(2)? 'default' :
qr/Additionally, a 500/;
ok t_cmp($content,
Re: cvs commit: httpd-test/perl-framework/t/apache errordoc.t
This makes the test fail against 2.0.50, but it's just a lack-of-feature
right, so OK if I half-revert this?
the last time I asked about this, the consensus was that the perl-framework
is expected to be for developer use only, expected to run (and in some cases
compile) successfully only on current CVS 1.3/2.0/2.1.
IIRC there are some things that will definitely fail in older httpd releases
(some mod_include stuff comes to mind) and we haven't coded around
have_min_apache_version for exactly this reason.
--- t/apache/errordoc.t 12 Jul 2004 17:03:49 - 1.3
+++ t/apache/errordoc.t 16 Jul 2004 12:16:25 -
@@ -59,7 +59,8 @@
'/redefine/notfound.html code');
# 1.3 requires quotes for hard-coded messages
-my $expected = have_apache(2) ? qr/Not Found/ :
+my $expected = have_min_apache_version('2.0.51') ? qr/Not Found/ :
+ have_apache(2)? 'default' :
qr/Additionally, a 500/;
ok t_cmp($content,
I'm not necessarily against this, except that this isn't the only test that
will fail if you use something less than cvs.
so, perhaps now is a good time to reevaluate the prior consensus. is the
perl-framework a developer tool or should we be accounting for httpd changes
between releases?
I just ran against 2.0.46 (which is the oldest httpd the mod_perl currently
supports, so I keep one laying around :) and the only failures are from
errordoc.t and include.t. while errordoc.t is easy enough to fix with your
patch, mod_include may be a bit more difficult, since IIRC the changes
spanned several httpd releases.
--Geoff
Re: cvs commit: httpd-test/perl-framework/t/apache errordoc.t
On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:08:42AM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote: This makes the test fail against 2.0.50, but it's just a lack-of-feature right, so OK if I half-revert this? the last time I asked about this, the consensus was that the perl-framework is expected to be for developer use only, expected to run (and in some cases compile) successfully only on current CVS 1.3/2.0/2.1. Well, my position is: I don't care whether it passes against 1.3 (which it doesn't :), I do care that it works against the latest 2.0 release along with tip-of-2.0-branch and 2.1/HEAD as you say. When testing for *bugs*, there's certainly a debate about whether to skip tests for bugs in older releases (I don't care much are about that). For *features*, I don't think there's much to argue about. We know this feature works only in 2.0.51 and later, so why test for it in earlier releases? (this is the only failure against 2.0.50 other than the mod_include unexpected passes fwiw) Regards, joe
Doc Links?
Why not use L for links in the docs? --- src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod.~1.33.~ Sat May 1 16:53:19 2004 +++ src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod Fri Jul 16 10:36:15 2004 @@ -3167,7 +3167,7 @@ to test any web application from end to end based application as if it were a black box accepting inputs and returning outputs. -It's available from http://puffin.sourceforge.net/ +It's available from Lhttp://puffin.sourceforge.net/ =back @@ -3179,8 +3179,8 @@ =item * more Apache-Test documentation -Testing mod_perl 2.0 -http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2003/05/22/testing.html +Testing mod_perl 2.0 +Lhttp://www.perl.com/pub/a/2003/05/22/testing.html Apache::Test manpage @@ -3188,10 +3188,10 @@ =item * extreme programming methodology -Extreme Programming: A Gentle Introduction: -http://www.extremeprogramming.org/. +Extreme Programming: A Gentle Introduction +Lhttp://www.extremeprogramming.org/. -Extreme Programming: http://www.xprogramming.com/. +Extreme Programming: Lhttp://www.xprogramming.com/. See also other sites linked from these URLs. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Test Doc =items
Hi All, Still looking at the testing.pod, I see list items like this: =over =item * -order=rotate rotate the tests: a, b, c, a, b, c =item * -order=repeat repeat the tests: a, a, b, b, c, c =item * -order=random run in the random order, e.g.: a, c, c, b, a, b =back I think that's generally considered a mixing of item styles. Is there a reason not to just make it: =over =item -order=rotate rotate the tests: a, b, c, a, b, c =item -order=repeat repeat the tests: a, a, b, b, c, c =item -order=random run in the random order, e.g.: a, c, c, b, a, b =back ? Regards, David smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Test Doc =items
On Jul 16, 2004, at 10:46 AM, David Wheeler wrote: Hi All, Still looking at the testing.pod, I see list items like this: Oops, wrong list for these questions. Apologies. Moving over to docs-dev... Regards, David
Re: Doc Links?
David Wheeler wrote: Why not use L for links in the docs? Because it's not supported by Pod::POM and wasn't part of the perlpodspec until recently. Pod::POM detects and auto-links http:// refs on its own, without needing L. --- src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod.~1.33.~Sat May 1 16:53:19 2004 +++ src/docs/general/testing/testing.podFri Jul 16 10:36:15 2004 @@ -3167,7 +3167,7 @@ to test any web application from end to end based application as if it were a black box accepting inputs and returning outputs. -It's available from http://puffin.sourceforge.net/ +It's available from Lhttp://puffin.sourceforge.net/ -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Test Docs Internal Links
David Wheeler wrote: Hi All, I expect that there was a reason that these links were created as they were? % podchecker -nowarnings src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod *** ERROR: unresolved internal link 'Writing_Tests' at line 89 in file src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod *** ERROR: unresolved internal link 'Using_Apache__Test_to_Speed_up_Project_Development' at line 210 in file src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod *** ERROR: unresolved internal link 'Debugging_Tests' at line 756 in file src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod *** ERROR: unresolved internal link 'item_extreme_programming_methodology' at line 776 in file src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod *** ERROR: unresolved internal link 'Basic_Testing_Environment' at line 3065 in file src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod has 5 pod syntax errors. Because really, the POD tools should be able to resolve the links without us having to change everything to underscores. For example, that first one should just be: LWriting Tests|Writing Tests ...and then the POD conversion tools should be able to properly find the internal link and do any necessary transformations. Or do they? Because we use Pod::POM with custom callbacks for generating #fragments. don't use podchecker, use bin/build -l to do links validation. See bin/build -h for more options. When DocSet, which powers modperl-docs, was written, the podspec was unsatisfactory for many purposes, so custom implementations were done. -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Is CVS Down?
David Wheeler wrote: % cvs ci -m 'Remove empty list item.' src/docs/general/testing/testing.pod cvs.apache.org: Connection refused cvs [commit aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages if any) works fine for me -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Test Doc =items
David Wheeler wrote: Hi All, Still looking at the testing.pod, I see list items like this: =over =item * -order=rotate rotate the tests: a, b, c, a, b, c =item * -order=repeat repeat the tests: a, a, b, b, c, c =item * -order=random run in the random order, e.g.: a, c, c, b, a, b =back I think that's generally considered a mixing of item styles. Is there a reason not to just make it: =over =item -order=rotate rotate the tests: a, b, c, a, b, c =item -order=repeat repeat the tests: a, a, b, b, c, c =item -order=random run in the random order, e.g.: a, c, c, b, a, b =back ? Without * it won't generate the bullets. I wanted the bullets so * is there. -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Doc Links?
On Jul 16, 2004, at 12:40 PM, Stas Bekman wrote: Because it's not supported by Pod::POM and wasn't part of the perlpodspec until recently. Pod::POM detects and auto-links http:// refs on its own, without needing L. Okay. David smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Test Doc =items
On Jul 16, 2004, at 12:48 PM, Stas Bekman wrote: Without * it won't generate the bullets. I wanted the bullets so * is there. Okay. David smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
