I noticed this functionality just now.. thanks a lot!
On 08/08/2011 12:38 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> Your wish is my command.
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Robby Findler
> wrote:
>> PS: I'm also happy if this class of tests only emails the responsible
>> person, and not the pusher.
>>
>> Ro
Your wish is my command.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> PS: I'm also happy if this class of tests only emails the responsible
> person, and not the pusher.
>
> Robby
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Robby Findler
> wrote:
>> I like the two-times-in-a-row thought.
>>
Could DrDr say "This build is not the latest" or "The latest push is
234234"?
On 08/08/2011 11:37 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> It is useful to test all of them to find out when errors start. It
> doesn't do the newest first, because then the calculation of "new
> issue" wouldn't make any sense, becau
It is useful to test all of them to find out when errors start. It
doesn't do the newest first, because then the calculation of "new
issue" wouldn't make any sense, because you wouldn't have the previous
push's tests.
Jay
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Jon Rafkind wrote:
> Another request: cou
This is a rare event (playing catchup like this) so I think it is
probably best if we just let it catch up. Should be just a couple of
more days (maybe a week) by my sketchy guesstimationizing.
Robby
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Jon Rafkind wrote:
> Another request: could DrDr process the la
Another request: could DrDr process the latest push first? Its a little
annoying to get emails for tests that failed when the latest push fixes
them but DrDr is so far behind. Is there any benefit to testing all the
intermediate pushes?
On 08/08/2011 09:56 AM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> I love DrDr
At Mon, 8 Aug 2011 11:06:30 -0500,
Robby Findler wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Vincent St-Amour
> wrote:
> > At Mon, 8 Aug 2011 10:59:24 -0500,
> > Robby Findler wrote:
> >> FWIW, please try to avoid race conditions of the second kind.
> >
> > Some of these I can try to fix. But I
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> At Mon, 8 Aug 2011 10:59:24 -0500,
> Robby Findler wrote:
>> FWIW, please try to avoid race conditions of the second kind.
>
> Some of these I can try to fix. But I don't think all intermittent
> failures fit in this category.
Right. I'm
At Mon, 8 Aug 2011 10:59:24 -0500,
Robby Findler wrote:
> FWIW, please try to avoid race conditions of the second kind.
Some of these I can try to fix. But I don't think all intermittent
failures fit in this category.
> I think the drracket test suites are special because they fail
> not-so-often
PS: I'm also happy if this class of tests only emails the responsible
person, and not the pusher.
Robby
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> I like the two-times-in-a-row thought.
>
> FWIW, please try to avoid race conditions of the second kind.
>
> I think the drracket test s
I like the two-times-in-a-row thought.
FWIW, please try to avoid race conditions of the second kind.
I think the drracket test suites are special because they fail
not-so-often and I don't actually know how to fix them. If either of
those weren't true then I'd say they should just not run in drd
I love DrDr, but there's a small thing that annoys me about it.
Some tests are prone to intermittent failures. For example, some
benchmarks need to create a file, and several benchmarks share the
same file, which leads to race conditions. Similarly, some DrRacket
tests sometimes fail for focus re
12 matches
Mail list logo
