Re: [SyncEvolution] Concurrent sync sessions update - Almost done
On Thu, 2012-03-15 at 08:42 +0100, Chris Kühl wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Patrick Ohly
<patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 17:18 +0100, Chris Kühl wrote:
>> It's been rebased and we've squashed the changes into about a dozen
>> commits. The tests seem to give us the same results as before the
>> rebase.
>
> And those are? In other words, which tests are known to fail, and why?
>
I've pushed a branch called css-without-known-test-failures[1] whose
most recent commit comments out all the tests in test/test-dbus.py
that fail. However, there as a bug I introduced during the last
rebase. The fix for that can be found here[2].
All but one of the failures is due to the incomplete AutoSync and
Connection functionality.
Incomplete in which sense? Helper-side and internal D-Bus APIs missing?
I can see how that could be a problem for Connection.
But for AutoSync I'm less sure. It's an implementation of a policy,
based on information in syncevo-dbus-server and causing actions there.
What is missing?
The restart test has never worked for us on
any branch.
Hmm, works in the nightly testing.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.