Re: ok to add optional timeout/sleep property for junit framework?

2007-12-06 Thread Daniel John Debrunner
Daniel John Debrunner wrote: Myrna van Lunteren wrote: Could this really be a bug, if the server doesn't start in over five minutes, even on a slow machine? Dan. I guess it could be...But, wouldn't it just never come up, then? No idea, that's the definition of a bug, unexpected/unexplained

Re: ok to add optional timeout/sleep property for junit framework?

2007-12-06 Thread Daniel John Debrunner
Myrna van Lunteren wrote: Could this really be a bug, if the server doesn't start in over five minutes, even on a slow machine? Dan. I guess it could be...But, wouldn't it just never come up, then? No idea, that's the definition of a bug, unexpected/unexplained behaviour. :-) DERBY-2616

Re: ok to add optional timeout/sleep property for junit framework?

2007-12-06 Thread Myrna van Lunteren
> Could this really be a bug, if the server doesn't start in over five > minutes, even on a slow machine? > > Dan. > > I guess it could be...But, wouldn't it just never come up, then? The problem I see isn't with just starting network server, but more with running the tests... And I could get the t

Re: ok to add optional timeout/sleep property for junit framework?

2007-12-05 Thread Daniel John Debrunner
Myrna van Lunteren wrote: Hi, The junit networkserver tests run with a setting that's specified in - at least - NetworkServerTestSetup. I find that this may not be applicable for all machines; I ran on some slower machines and the setting wasn't enough. I remember that one of the detractors for

ok to add optional timeout/sleep property for junit framework?

2007-12-05 Thread Myrna van Lunteren
Hi, The junit networkserver tests run with a setting that's specified in - at least - NetworkServerTestSetup. I find that this may not be applicable for all machines; I ran on some slower machines and the setting wasn't enough. I remember that one of the detractors for the old test harness was th