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

Test clients against bad servers #206

Closed
rgrinberg opened this Issue Nov 16, 2014 · 11 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@rgrinberg
Member

rgrinberg commented Nov 16, 2014

https://github.com/kevinburke/hamms provides runnable examples of scenarios with bad servers. Would be interesting to see how our clients fare.

@avsm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@avsm

avsm Nov 17, 2014

Member

That looks splendidly useful.

Member

avsm commented Nov 17, 2014

That looks splendidly useful.

@avsm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@avsm
Member

avsm commented Nov 17, 2014

@objmagic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@objmagic

objmagic Nov 29, 2014

Contributor

Hi, @rgrinberg. I recently decided to make some contribution to the Mirage project. Anil guided me to the project page which I may work on. So, I would like to start with spending some time playing with "hamms" and "pathod.net", and see if I can fix some potential bugs :)

Contributor

objmagic commented Nov 29, 2014

Hi, @rgrinberg. I recently decided to make some contribution to the Mirage project. Anil guided me to the project page which I may work on. So, I would like to start with spending some time playing with "hamms" and "pathod.net", and see if I can fix some potential bugs :)

@rgrinberg

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rgrinberg

rgrinberg Nov 29, 2014

Member

Welcome @marklrh ! I think you will find these tools a fertile ground for finding new cohttp bugs. Good luck and don't hesitate to ask us anything if you get stuck.

Member

rgrinberg commented Nov 29, 2014

Welcome @marklrh ! I think you will find these tools a fertile ground for finding new cohttp bugs. Good luck and don't hesitate to ask us anything if you get stuck.

@objmagic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@objmagic

objmagic Dec 3, 2014

Contributor

@rgrinberg @avsm I set a repo to keep track of my progress. I am going to have finals this month, so the progress may be a little bit slow. (´・_・`)

Contributor

objmagic commented Dec 3, 2014

@rgrinberg @avsm I set a repo to keep track of my progress. I am going to have finals this month, so the progress may be a little bit slow. (´・_・`)

@rgrinberg

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rgrinberg

rgrinberg Dec 3, 2014

Member

Awesome. Looks like you used @avsm 's favorite license as well ^_^

Member

rgrinberg commented Dec 3, 2014

Awesome. Looks like you used @avsm 's favorite license as well ^_^

@avsm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@avsm

avsm Dec 3, 2014

Member

Awesome -- stay focussed on your finals! And use a decent license when you're done :-)

Member

avsm commented Dec 3, 2014

Awesome -- stay focussed on your finals! And use a decent license when you're done :-)

@objmagic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@objmagic

objmagic Jan 1, 2015

Contributor

I've done all the tests using hamms (sorry for taking so much time). I've studied pathod, which provides more comprehensive features. I guess we can use it to test any specific problems

Contributor

objmagic commented Jan 1, 2015

I've done all the tests using hamms (sorry for taking so much time). I've studied pathod, which provides more comprehensive features. I guess we can use it to test any specific problems

@rgrinberg

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rgrinberg

rgrinberg Jan 27, 2015

Member

@marklrh do you think we can conclude this ticket now?

Member

rgrinberg commented Jan 27, 2015

@marklrh do you think we can conclude this ticket now?

@objmagic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@objmagic

objmagic Jan 27, 2015

Contributor

Yes if you and Anil think there is no need to do more tests


Runhang Li
University of California, Los Angeles

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Rudi Grinberg notifications@github.com
wrote:

@marklrh do you think we can conclude this ticket now?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#206 (comment)

Contributor

objmagic commented Jan 27, 2015

Yes if you and Anil think there is no need to do more tests


Runhang Li
University of California, Los Angeles

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Rudi Grinberg notifications@github.com
wrote:

@marklrh do you think we can conclude this ticket now?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#206 (comment)

@rgrinberg

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rgrinberg

rgrinberg Jan 27, 2015

Member

Well I believe we've completed the original hamms tests. They did end up catching a bug (reported elsewhere as well) but we've fixed.

My vote would be to close this and/or make some final remarks now.

Member

rgrinberg commented Jan 27, 2015

Well I believe we've completed the original hamms tests. They did end up catching a bug (reported elsewhere as well) but we've fixed.

My vote would be to close this and/or make some final remarks now.

@rgrinberg rgrinberg closed this Mar 13, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment