Re: Upcoming new test-suite release
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:00:00 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spf.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Stefano Bagnara wrote: > Stefano Bagnara ha scritto: > > Julian Mehnle ha scritto: > > > You'll see that this isn't exactly good proof that an implementation > > > passes the test suite, but it at least demonstrates that the test > > > suite has been run in some way. > > > > We run it as part of our continuos integration build. > > We run it at least 200 times per day and at least once per each > > commit. > > > > If you just need a log of the test run to certificate jSPF I'm > > happy.. I'll send you the next output. > > Here is the last successful build test result. I think it's more fancy > than your perl log, isn't it? This isn't about being fancy. > http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/view/James/job/jspf-trunk/402/org.apache.james.jspf$resolver/testReport/org.apache.james.jspf/RFC4408YamlTest/ That looks acceptable (though as I said it isn't exactly good proof). Is there a _release_ version of jSPF that passes _that_release_ of the test suite? And which release of the test suite was that? 2007.05? > The test above is for our latest trunk tested against the latest yaml > testsuite from your trunk. Please don't use "trunk" versions of our test suite (i.e., do not use the file named "rfc4408-tests.yml"). That's the development version. Please use the files named "rfc4408-tests-YYYY.MM.yml" instead. > We only make releases when our product passes all of the last yaml > suite tests. > > In fact our build tools reject to build jSPF at all if there are > failures. That's certainly good practice. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkisB0AACgkQwL7PKlBZWjvj5wCgm9HzVgFYUcmNN+ugjhmrK1d+ JRQAn1xdxtdfo3HR7rn7hESbpq9q1gph =lJxP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----