lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Itamar Syn-Hershko <ita...@code972.com>
Subject Re: Releasing 3.0.3
Date Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:27:32 GMT
Sorry, misread your question

This can be easily done with xUnit, using Theories.

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>wrote:

> Something like:
>
> Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture = cultureInfo;
> Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentUICulture = cultureInfo;
>
> And setting it back later when the test is done.
>
> You can easily do this with an IDisposable like this:
>
> using(new TemporaryCulture(culture)){
> ...
> }
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Simon Svensson <sisve@devhost.se> wrote:
>
>> I've been thinking about LUCENENET-493 (Make Lucene.Net culture
>> insensitive). It's easy to fix the code, and verify it on my machine
>> (running CurrentCulture=sv-SE), but there are no tests to confirm the
>> changes. I've been looking for ways to build test cases for different
>> cultures, like the overridden runBare method used originally in the java
>> code, but NUnit does not seem to have any such abilities within the tests
>> themselves.
>>
>> 1) It is possible to build NUnit addins that could execute every test
>> [with special annotation?] once for every culture. Resharper supports NUnit
>> addins, provided they are manually placed in the correct folder under the
>> resharper application folder.
>> 2) We could rewrite culture sensitive tests into method that holds the
>> logic, and several test methods with [SetCulture("...")], but this requires
>> knowledge about what tests are culture sensitive. We could also rewrite
>> every method into a foreach-loop, executing the test logic with every
>> culture.
>> 3) Change unit testing framework.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>>
>> On 2012-06-14 17:58, Prescott Nasser wrote:
>>
>>> I'm going to try and review some of them - looking at the 3.5 ticket
>>> atm. The code should be in compliance with 3.0.3. We might want to do some
>>> spot checking various parts of the code. I'm not sure about the tests.
>>> Also, we should probably run some code coverage tools to see how much
>>> coverage we have.
>>> ~P
>>>
>>>> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 18:37:12 +0300
>>>> Subject: Re: Releasing 3.0.3
>>>> From: itamar@code972.com
>>>> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.**org<lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, and is the code in 100% compliance with the 3.0.3 Java code?
>>>>
>>>> I'll be spending some time on fixing the index corruption issue, and it
>>>> is
>>>> probably best for Chris to wrap up the work he has started
>>>>
>>>> Anyone else on board to close some tickets?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Prescott Nasser<geobmx540@hotmail.com>
>>>> **wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Agreed -
>>>>> JIRA for 3.0.3
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/LUCENENET/**
>>>>> fixforversion/12316215#**selectedTab=com.atlassian.**
>>>>> jira.plugin.system.project%**3Aversion-issues-panel<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET/fixforversion/12316215#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aversion-issues-panel>
>>>>> We should evaluate all of these - fix them, mark as won't fix, or move
>>>>> them to another release version. I think the biggest hold up currently
>>>>> is:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/LUCENENET-484<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-484>.
>>>>> Chris has made a
>>>>> huge dent, but there are two test cases that are still listed as
>>>>> failing (I
>>>>> can't even duplicate those failures to know where to start)
>>>>> Also we should look at all the other jira tickets and make updates
>>>>> where
>>>>> appropriate
>>>>> ~P
>>>>>
>>>>>> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:21:04 +0300
>>>>>> Subject: Releasing 3.0.3
>>>>>> From: itamar@code972.com
>>>>>> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.**org<lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where do we stand with this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I want to push to a 3.0.3 release, what items are still pending?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Itamar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message