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: Lucene.NET to .NET Core
Date Sun, 19 Jun 2016 09:49:17 GMT
"All these issues together lead us to the conclusion that we would be doing
a disservice to just blindly port to xUnit." - why do you say that? if a
move to xUnit benefits us on multiple occasions (better API, .NET Core
support, faster runs) this one-tine effort would be worth it - no?

Wyatt, can you chime in perhaps - you have the most experience getting the
build system to run, and test categorisation

Thanks

--

Itamar Syn-Hershko
http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
Freelance Developer & Consultant
Lucene.NET committer and PMC member

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Elizabeth Maher (NEWMAN) <
Elizabeth.Maher@microsoft.com> wrote:

> Hi all.  I have a quick update on our progress.
>
> We did a test of what it would be like to port Lucene.NET to use xUnit.
> As Itamer guessed, it is quite a bit of work.  The basic work of renaming
> attributes and changing out package names and the like is a little tedious,
> but it is doable.  The issues comes in because of the use of categories and
> timeout attributes.  Creating categories in xUnit is possible, but rather
> complicated.  The bigger issue is that my research indicated that TeamCity
> only has basic integration with xUnit and you have to run all the tests.
> Running only categories requires extra scripting.  The bigger issue was
> that there is no TimeOut attribute in xUnit so longer running tests are an
> issue.  We would also have to re-arrange some the test fixture setup and
> teardown code into class constructors and dispose methods, but that work
> was doable.  All these issues together lead us to the conclusion that we
> would be doing a disservice to just blindly port to xUnit.
>
> nUnit has just release an alpha package that runs on .NET Core RC2.
> Connie is looking into getting working this week or next to so we can keep
> the use of such features as testcase timeouts and categories.  We'll send
> an update when we've tried out the alpha package.
>
> Thanks,
> Elizabeth
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elizabeth Maher (NEWMAN) [mailto:Elizabeth.Maher@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 4:40 PM
> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Lucene.NET to .NET Core
>
> Thank you everyone for the feedback.
>
> It's sounds everyone is favor of the move to xUnit.  I've talked to a
> couple of my co-workers and they said the conversion can be a little
> tedious, but often worth the effort.  Give me a couple days to see if it’s
> a rabbits hole.  I'll respond back if its more effort that I can expend.
>
> Itamar,
> Regarding your last question.  There are no more know tasks other than
> what I initially outlined.  Once I merge Connie's change in from master we
> will have a building/ported assembly.  I just need to get the tests running
> to verify everything works as expected.
>
> Thanks,
> Elizabeth
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: itamar.synhershko@gmail.com [mailto:itamar.synhershko@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Itamar Syn-Hershko
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 6:46 AM
> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET to .NET Core
>
> Hey there,
>
> Thank you so much again for your great work here. Lots of good
> contributions we could definitely use.
>
> Moving to xUnit.Net was actually on my list of things to do - basically
> also because it's API is much better and more flexible (and less buggy!)
> and my experience with it was much better than with NUnit (which we use an
> outdated version of). Some people claim xUnit is also faster, so hey - why
> not.
>
> Are you sure you can "easily move all tests to xUnit"? From what I can
> tell this will be a rather rigorous copy-paste job? While the
> JavaCompatibility bits we have (
>
> https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/tree/master/src/Lucene.Net.TestFramework/JavaCompatibility
> )
> do contain centralized function like assertTrue() etc that save loads of
> time and effort porting tests, so that could be changed easily to use
> xUnit, there are many places where asserts etc where ported in full to the
> NUnit API.
>
> I am definitely pro this change, but let's make sure we don't go down into
> a rabbit hole first. Let me know what you think.
>
> With regards to the status update:
>
> 1. I made some last minor comments on the merge scheduler PR - we should
> be able to merge it within a few days now. Great work there
>
> 2. What is keeping us from merging your ICU etc changes? please note some
> subprojects are absolutely necessary for Lucene.NET to run on Core CLR as
> well - even though they are "sub" projects and not part of the Lucene core
> itself. Queries and Analysis are probably the biggest ones (latter not
> fully ported yet, and it's the one with the ICU dep).
>
> 3. Other than what you posted - are there any other pending items to get
> this running on .NET Core?
>
> --
>
> Itamar Syn-Hershko
>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fcode972.com&data=01%7c01%7cElizabeth.Maher%40microsoft.com%7c443f03152dfd451ebb1c08d380b51eba%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=HxE52%2bFAC6FJAN%2fifQ5V8v27tZZALzBuDw2yhbw%2bkc8%3d
> | @synhershko <
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2ftwitter.com%2fsynhershko&data=01%7c01%7cElizabeth.Maher%40microsoft.com%7c443f03152dfd451ebb1c08d380b51eba%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=7iqRqwQwlcNbmwkckUjcS1MWjUPJi3cxLFfRdLc3BnQ%3d
> >
> Freelance Developer & Consultant
> Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Elizabeth Maher (NEWMAN) <
> Elizabeth.Maher@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> > Lucene.NET Community,
> >
> > Connie and I continue to make progress on moving Lucene.NET to .NET Core.
> > The last challenge we face is to get the tests to successfully run on
> > .NET Core.  Currently the unit tests use NUnit.  There is a .NET Core
> > version called NUnitLite.  However, the issue is there is some manual
> > steps to get NUnitLite tests to work on .NET Core.  We would have to
> > create console applications for each of the test library, call the
> > appropriate APIs to create a test results file and then work with the
> > CI system to manually upload the results.  Also, there is not Test
> > Runner integration for NUnitLite.  While, this is all possible to do,
> > I would like to propose a different change.  I could easily move all
> > the test to use xUnit.  The would benefit Lucene.NET in the long run
> > as there are both full fx<
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fxunit
> > .github.io%2fdocs%2fgetting-started-desktop.html&data=01%7c01%7cElizab
> > eth.Maher%40microsoft.com%7c443f03152dfd451ebb1c08d380b51eba%7c72f988b
> > f86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=2orwADQfb%2fkpCykXkySekBp0Dxanw0WR
> > rUupy%2fzRFTY%3d> and core fx<
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fxunit
> > .github.io%2fdocs%2fgetting-started-dotnet-core.html&data=01%7c01%7cEl
> > izabeth.Maher%40microsoft.com%7c443f03152dfd451ebb1c08d380b51eba%7c72f
> > 988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=UGKx5nz6%2foaV2vt2LQDTqkpn0g%2
> > bu2XXHzE4pDZ0K%2fhU%3d> versions of xUnit, there is a TeamCity plugin
> > that automatically works<
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fxunit
> > .github.io%2fdocs%2fgetting-test-results-in-teamcity.html&data=01%7c01
> > %7cElizabeth.Maher%40microsoft.com%7c443f03152dfd451ebb1c08d380b51eba%
> > 7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=an0p3MTPFYe24wQiPq3SsF3Eb
> > v3gwJwrr88TjoQ4DnM%3d>, as well as the ability to run tests in Visual
> > Studio.<
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fxunit
> > .github.io%2fdocs%2fgetting-started-dotnet-core.html%23run-tests-vs&da
> > ta=01%7c01%7cElizabeth.Maher%40microsoft.com%7c443f03152dfd451ebb1c08d
> > 380b51eba%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=BN%2f3XEmrUyKQu
> > 8tdZtoghxSskpFBPP1N1YGxT7e45Vc%3d.>
> > I believe the long-term maintenance cost for both full and core fx
> > tests would be lower using xUnit.  Is this an acceptable direction for
> > me to take the unit tests?  Please let me know.
> >
> > Below is the progress of our migration work, for the curious.
> >
> > 1.       Remove use of SharpZipLib dependency - completed
> >
> > 2.       Update ICU4NET dependency for .NET Core - completed in dev
> branch
> >
> > a.        In https://github.com/conniey/lucenenet/tree/move2dnx.
> >
> > 3.       Remove Appache.NMS dependency - completed
> >
> > 4.       Move Scheduler to use Tasks - PR submitted
> >
> > a.        Pull request at https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/171.
> >
> > 5.       Make portable libraries to build .NET Core binaries - completed
> > in dev branch
> >
> > a.        In https://github.com/conniey/lucenenet/tree/move2dnx.
> >
> > 6.       Verify tests pass on both full framework and .Net Core. - In
> > progress
> >
> > a.        Need to get tests to run on .NET Core.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Elizabeth
> >
>

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