9:58 p.m.
More and more Emacs packages provide test files based on ert. It might
be useful to have ert provided as XEmacs package, because the tests from
GNU Emacs could run under XEmacs as well.
For example, for me as Tramp maintainer it would be very appreciated to
run ert under XEmacs, because today I cannot apply serious tests with
XEmacs before I release a new Tramp version. With ert, I could apply
tramp-test.el, and I would be much more confident that Tramp works also
with XEmacs.
Opinions?
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
12:03 a.m.
>>>> Michael Albinus <michael.albinus(a)gmx.de>
writes:
Opinions?
Sounds good to me. I've been missing unit tests in the packages and if
ert will take us a step closer to that it would be great.
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
5:54 a.m.
Michael Albinus writes:
More and more Emacs packages provide test files based on ert. It
might be useful to have ert provideed as XEmacs package, because the
tests from GNU Emacs could run under XEmacs as well.
I don't have any objection, but I'm not available to do much work,
unfortunately. I'll answer question and fix bugs if I encounter them,
though.
Of course, XEmacs has had the test-harness.el testing framework that's
been quite useful for *18 years*. It's about time GNU caught on. ;-)
Not to mention that all of the test-harness code is by people who've
signed FSF assignments (except Ben, and he would if RMS could ever
learn that cooperation is a two-way street -- watching the recent
discussion of Info-HTML, obviously it's not worth holding my breath).
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:29 a.m.
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Michael Albinus writes:
> More and more Emacs packages provide test files based on ert. It
> might be useful to have ert provideed as XEmacs package, because the
> tests from GNU Emacs could run under XEmacs as well.
I don't have any objection, but I'm not available to do much work,
unfortunately. I'll answer question and fix bugs if I encounter them,
though.
Obviously(*), I'm not the man to add this package to XEmacs. But since I
have experience with it, and I also added some features, I would be
willing to help in porting to XEmacs.
Of course, XEmacs has had the test-harness.el testing framework
that's
been quite useful for *18 years*. It's about time GNU caught on. ;-)
Well, in Tramp there have been even some test-harness files, written by
Daniel Pittman IIRC. But they haven't been in a useful state ever.
Not to mention that all of the test-harness code is by people
who've
signed FSF assignments (except Ben, and he would if RMS could ever
learn that cooperation is a two-way street -- watching the recent
discussion of Info-HTML, obviously it's not worth holding my breath).
Ach ...
(*): I'm not an XEmacs user, you know. So I lack both the expertise to
add such a package, and sufficient time to spend.
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
7:40 p.m.
Michael Albinus writes:
Obviously(*), I'm not the man to add this package to XEmacs. But
since I
have experience with it, and I also added some features, I would be
willing to help in porting to XEmacs.
Well, Mats seemed interested. Maybe he's got some time.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:14 p.m.
>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Well, Mats seemed interested. Maybe he's got some time.
I can have a look at it any way. It doesn't sound that hard but who
knows what will pop up ;-)
＠Michael -- Is there some good test cases in tramp that will work with
XEmacs 21.5 that I could use to verify at least some basic
functionality or ert or maybe ert comes with its own unit tests?
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:39 p.m.
Mats Lidell <matsl(a)xemacs.org> writes:
＠Michael -- Is there some good test cases in tramp that will work
with
XEmacs 21.5 that I could use to verify at least some basic
functionality or ert or maybe ert comes with its own unit tests?
tramp-test.el is already in xemacs-packages/tramp/test/. Currently, it
uses a hard-coded mock remote directory for test, which applies the GNU
Emacs syntax "/ssh:host:path". You could overwrite it by setting
environment variable $REMOTE_TEMPORARY_FILE_DIRECTORY to something like
"/[ssh/host]:path". Then, the test case tramp-test00-availability shall
be applicable (but I don't know whether file-remote-p returns a proper
result in XEmacs).
Other good test cases might be tramp-test07-file-exists-p ..
tramp-test25-load, but I don't guarantee for any of them to succeed in
XEmacs. That's what I want to check :-)
tramp-test26-process-file .. tramp-test34-unload are likely to fail with
XEmacs.
ert has own test cases as well, you'll find them in the GNU Emacs tree
as test/automated/ert-tests.el.
Yours
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
2:33 p.m.
>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
I don't have any objection, but I'm not available to do much
work,
unfortunately. I'll answer question and fix bugs if I encounter
them, though.
If I'm not mistaken it is just one elisp file so what do you say about
adding it to xemacs-base?
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4:26 p.m.
Mats Lidell <matsl(a)xemacs.org> writes:
>>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org>
writes:
> I don't have any objection, but I'm not available to do much work,
> unfortunately. I'll answer question and fix bugs if I encounter
> them, though.
If I'm not mistaken it is just one elisp file so what do you say about
adding it to xemacs-base?
There is also ert.texi for the manual.
ert-x.el, which also exists in GNU Emacs, is not needed immediately.
There is only one file (test/automated/electric-tests.el) in GNU Emacs
which uses it.
Yours
Best regards, Michael.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
7:55 p.m.
Mats Lidell writes:
If I'm not mistaken it is just one elisp file so what do you say
about
adding it to xemacs-base?
Just from the name, I think xemacs-devel is probably more
appropriate. The question would be how many developers building these
packages don't have xemacs-devel installed. I would think that would
be few, but if there are more than a small number, we could put in in
xemacs-base.
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:07 p.m.
>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Just from the name, I think xemacs-devel is probably more
appropriate. [...]
I just thought that we would like to add a test target to the
packages. So it would be convenient to be able to do a "make test" in
each package that depends on it. So each package, that use ert at
least, would have to depend on the package were ert is situated. This
way the package smoketest could include a unit test for each package
that supports it.
Since all packages already depend on xemacs-base that would be a good
place for it I thought. But maybe it is as good or better to have the
test target to introduce a dependency on xemacs-devel implicitly!?
Yours
--
%% Mats
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
8:25 a.m.
Mats Lidell writes:
Since all packages already depend on xemacs-base that would be a
good
place for it I thought. But maybe it is as good or better to have the
test target to introduce a dependency on xemacs-devel implicitly!?
I think I'd prefer the latter, although it is a complication. At
present, the package infrastructure doesn't distinguish between run
time, install time, and build time dependencies, so adding this would
add an install time dependency to all packages.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
3612
days inactive
3615
days old
11 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Michael Albinus -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
The XEmacs Package Smoketest