[rfc][icedtea-web] Makefile Reproducer Tests Patch

[Jiri Vanek]

On 09/17/2014 02:54 PM, Jie Kang wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> On 09/16/2014 10:36 PM, Jie Kang wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>
>>> This patch modifies the makefile and causes it to only process (compile,
>>> copy, etc.) tests in the whitelist.
>>>
>>> This feature is greatly beneficial when running say
>>>
>>> 'make run-netx-dist-tests'
>>>
>>> which uses the whitelist to only run tests in the whitelist. Prior to this
>>> patch, though the tests ran were filtered by the whitelist, all tests were
>>> processed (compiled, resources moved, etc.). This wastes a large amount of
>>> time processing tests that aren't run.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>>
>>
>> By doing so, the dependences of reproducer may not be compiled and installed.
>> Is it what you wont?
>
> Hello,
>
>
> If a reproducer depends on another reproducer than I think it should be up to the dev to deal with that appropriately through documentation, etc. In the best-case scenario, no test, including reproducers, should have any dependency on another test.
>
> Maybe we can add this functionality as a separate option? Then test-runner can choose to compile+install all tests, or compile+install only tests in the whitelist. This might be a good compromise.
>
>
I would say no.

The author of whitelist modifications should be aware of his depnedencies. They are moreover easily 
grep-able  from jnlp.

So on one side I would be happy for this change. On second side I'm hesitating. Imagine test testing 
class not found, loading some remote depndence.  Then it will not clear if it failed because of 
whitelist, or becasue of bug. And imagine you are fresh to itw and encounter this.

The configure option seems to be good compromise.  BY default all will be compiled+isntalled. On 
demand, only whitelist.

if you wont you may (read must in this case) add this configure option as another changeset.

The only request for now is that "*" must keep working :)


J.