Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove mock/test solutions for differential build test #139

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 13, 2017

Conversation

ryukinix
Copy link
Member

Affects:

  • Problem300
  • Problem301

@a-hilaly
Copy link
Member

@ryukinix this case isn't discussed in what I have implemented (removing solutions ) thats why PR build is raising No such file or directory exception.
I don't understand why 2 builds started up here

@ryukinix
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, I understand. We need fix that. I'm merging that because we need remove this files, but we need fix that on stats.py and check the files before testing it, just use os.path.exists function and we are ok.

Implements filter_exists function designed to be used with
pipelines.
@ryukinix
Copy link
Member Author

Let's me see... maybe I can fix that easily.
I fixed that, but now I have another problem.

python3 stats.py --build --files test build all the tests, why?

@ryukinix
Copy link
Member Author

ryukinix commented Nov 13, 2017

There is two type of travis CI events: Pull Requests and Push. Push event occurs when I do git push of a new branch of the repository like remove-garbage through git checkout -b cancer; git push -u origin cancer. The pull request event occurs when I try merging that branch through the pull request: usually for me hub pull-request.

In general push events occurs first than PR, since we first make a new branch so then create a PR.

We need make some changes later about push events on Travis CI, because for now this is what we have:

image

We got this weird error.

@ryukinix
Copy link
Member Author

@lubien help --force --calling copycat-master

@ryukinix ryukinix requested a review from lubien November 13, 2017 23:17
@ryukinix
Copy link
Member Author

I'm merging that, but we need fix that weird errors, ok @a-hilaly ?

@ryukinix ryukinix merged commit f9e5142 into master Nov 13, 2017
@ryukinix ryukinix mentioned this pull request Nov 13, 2017
2 tasks
@a-hilaly
Copy link
Member

a-hilaly commented Nov 14, 2017

python3 stats.py --build --files test build all the tests, why?

stats.py

at stats.py handle_option()

uncommited_solutions, uncommited_core_files = handle_files(options.files)
...
df = build_result(df[langs_selected],
                              options.all,
                              options.blame,
                              only=tbsolutions)

at build_results

_problems = only if only else solutions_paths(df)
for lang, spath in _problems:

this is normal since when you deleted 2 problems and then just modified test, only which uncommitted_solutions is empty so _problems is becoming solutions_paths instead ( why causes to build all problems ).
its true that it have lot of things fixed but #136 was merged too early, because there are many cases that aren't discussed that can make all build confusing

We got this weird error.

never seen anything like that

I'm merging that, but we need fix that weird errors, ok @a-hilaly ?

Yes sure we need to complete and secure #136

@ryukinix
Copy link
Member Author

its true that it have lot of things fixed but #136 was merged too early, because there are many cases that aren't discussed that can make all build confusing

Yes, my fault. Sorry.

@ryukinix
Copy link
Member Author

ryukinix commented Nov 14, 2017

this is normal since when you deleted 2 problems and then just modified test, only which uncommitted_solutions is empty so _problems is becoming solutions_paths instead ( why causes to build all problems ).

I understand now. It is solution design. Thanks for explaining it. Thinking better maybe this behavior is a good thing. (maybe, I'm not sure)

@ryukinix ryukinix deleted the remove-garbage branch November 14, 2017 08:13
@a-hilaly
Copy link
Member

I understand now. Is solution design. Thanks for explaining it. Thinking better maybe this behavior is a good thing. (maybe, I'm not sure)

I know its a bit lego-ed x( , it needs also renaming of many things for better understanding. I will add some changes trying to fix the "lego" maybe this time we have a clearer way

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants