[Red5devs] Request for review

[Art Clarke]

And here's an example of what a successful system-test looks like
(i.e. the artifacts you can review):
http://build.theyard.net/job/red5_java_server_trunk_jdk6_i386_ubuntu_systemtest/1/

- Art

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Art Clarke <aclarke at vlideshow.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I have finished the first draft of the test framework I proposed two
> weeks ago.  Major thanks to Thijs who helped set up the initial server
> and showed me how to get Tomcat, Apache and Hudson playing nice.
>
> The bulk of my changes are checked in under the
> svn/java/server/branches/aclarke_autotest branch(*),
>
> You can find full documentation of what I did here:
> http://ofb.net/~aclarke/theyard/HOWTO-TestRed5.html
>
> What I'd love for folks to do is:
> 1) Go to build.theyard.net and see what you get.
>
>    Right now 1 Unit test fails on Java 1.6, and more fail on Java
> 1.5.  I'd like to get this to 100% before fully commiting, but I
> wanted to show you what failures look like.  Also, it is only
> auto-building my branch.  If we merge with trunk, I'll change it to
> build trunk.
>
> 2) Check out the "systemtest" builds in particular, and look at the
> PNG files.  This is running a flash application that tests playing
> back video files, and you get snapshots every 5 seconds.
>
> 3) Read through the documentation I posted above and let's iterate on
> suggested changes to the system, documentation, or both.
>
> 4) Thijs has kindly volunteered to review the Flash code I checked in,
> but others should feel free to do the same: svn/flash/trunk/selftest
>
> 5) Paul, any chance you could work with me to review what's in the
> Java server branch.  There aren't really any Java code changes, just
> build changes that are only executed if you call the new test targets
> (see doc): svn/java/server/branches/aclarke_autotest/
>
> Once that's done, I'd like the team to make a "keep it or chuck it" decision.
>
> Why?  Because this kind of framework can be useful if the team wants
> it, and can be REALLY ANNOYING if people don't.  Far better to not
> have this running if it's not useful, than running and spamming people
> :)  Don't worry about insulting me if you think it's not worth it --
> I'd much rather know that.
>
> If folks decide it's good, and we iterate to agreement, then I'll get
> it in the branch.
>
> Happy reading and I look forward to your feedback.
>
> - Art
>
> *: I also checked some code into svn/flash/selftest and
> svn/builds/remote/trunk/ per Thijs recommendations.  These are not
> branched, but are easily removed if we want to reject them.
>