From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, calvinwan@gmail.com, szeder.dev@gmail.com,
phillip.wood123@gmail.com, chooglen@google.com, avarab@gmail.com,
sandals@crustytoothpaste.net
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] unit tests: Add a project plan document
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 15:30:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq7cs73sic.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8afdb215d7e10ca16a2ce8226b4127b3d8a2d971.1686352386.git.steadmon@google.com> (Josh Steadmon's message of "Fri, 9 Jun 2023 16:25:30 -0700")
Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com> writes:
> In our current testing environment, we spend a significant amount of
> effort crafting end-to-end tests for error conditions that could easily
> be captured by unit tests (or we simply forgo some hard-to-setup and
> rare error conditions).Describe what we hope to accomplish by
> implementing unit tests, and explain some open questions and milestones.
> Discuss desired features for test frameworks/harnesses, and provide a
> preliminary comparison of several different frameworks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
> Coauthored-by: Calvin Wan <calvinwan@google.com>
> ---
The co-author should also signal his acceptance of the D-C-O with
his own S-o-b. [*1*] gives a good example.
> diff --git a/Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt b/Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..dac8062a43
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@
> += Unit Testing
> +
> +In our current testing environment, we spend a significant amount of effort
> +crafting end-to-end tests for error conditions that could easily be captured by
> +unit tests (or we simply forgo some hard-to-setup and rare error conditions).
> +Unit tests additionally provide stability to the codebase and can simplify
> +debugging through isolation. Writing unit tests in pure C, rather than with our
> +current shell/test-tool helper setup, simplifies test setup, simplifies passing
> +data around (no shell-isms required), and reduces testing runtime by not
> +spawning a separate process for every test invocation.
> +
> +We believe that a large body of unit tests, living alongside the existing test
> +suite, will improve code quality for the Git project.
> +
> +== Definitions
> +
> +For the purposes of this document, we'll use *test framework* to refer to
> +projects that support writing test cases and running tests within the context
> +of a single executable. *Test harness* will refer to projects that manage
> +running multiple executables (each of which may contain multiple test cases) and
> +aggregating their results.
> +
> +In reality, these terms are not strictly defined, and many of the projects
> +discussed below contain features from both categories.
> +
OK.
> +== Choosing a framework & harness
> +
> +=== Desired features
> +
> +==== TAP support
> +
> +The https://testanything.org/[Test Anything Protocol] is a text-based interface
> +that allows tests to communicate with a test harness. It is already used by
> +Git's integration test suite. Supporting TAP output is a mandatory feature for
> +any prospective test framework.
> +
> +==== Diagnostic output
> +
> +When a test case fails, the framework must generate enough diagnostic output to
> +help developers find the appropriate test case in source code in order to debug
> +the failure.
> +
> +==== Parallel execution
> +
> +Ideally, we will build up a significant collection of unit tests cases, most
> +likely split across multiple executables. It will be necessary to run these
> +tests in parallel to enable fast develop-test-debug cycles.
> +
> +==== Vendorable or ubiquitous
> +
> +If possible, we want to avoid forcing Git developers to install new tools just
> +to run unit tests. So any prospective frameworks and harnesses must either be
> +vendorable (meaning, we can copy their source directly into Git's repository),
> +or so ubiquitous that it is reasonable to expect that most developers will have
> +the tools installed already.
> +
> +==== Maintainable / extensible
> +
> +It is unlikely that any pre-existing project perfectly fits our needs, so any
> +project we select will need to be actively maintained and open to accepting
> +changes. Alternatively, assuming we are vendoring the source into our repo, it
> +must be simple enough that Git developers can feel comfortable making changes as
> +needed to our version.
> +
> +==== Major platform support
> +
> +At a bare minimum, unit-testing must work on Linux, MacOS, and Windows.
> +
> +==== Lazy test planning
> +
> +TAP supports the notion of _test plans_, which communicate which test cases are
> +expected to run, or which tests actually ran. This allows test harnesses to
> +detect if the TAP output has been truncated, or if some tests were skipped due
> +to errors or bugs.
> +
> +The test framework should handle creating plans at runtime, rather than
> +requiring test developers to manually create plans, which leads to both human-
> +and merge-errors.
> +
> +==== Skippable tests
> +
> +Test authors may wish to skip certain test cases based on runtime circumstances,
> +so the framework should support this.
> +
> +==== Test scheduling / re-running
> +
> +The test harness scheduling should be configurable so that e.g. developers can
> +choose to run slow tests first, or to run only tests that failed in a previous
> +run.
> +
> +==== Mock support
> +
> +Unit test authors may wish to test code that interacts with objects that may be
> +inconvenient to handle in a test (e.g. interacting with a network service).
> +Mocking allows test authors to provide a fake implementation of these objects
> +for more convenient tests.
> +
> +==== Signal & exception handling
> +
> +The test framework must fail gracefully when test cases are themselves buggy or
> +when they are interrupted by signals during runtime.
> +
> +==== Coverage reports
> +
> +It may be convenient to generate coverage reports when running unit tests
> +(although it may be possible to accomplish this regardless of test framework /
> +harness support).
Good to see evaluation criteria listed.
[Reference]
*1* https://lore.kernel.org/git/836a5665b7df065811edc678cb8e70004f7b7c49.1683581621.git.me@ttaylorr.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-13 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-17 23:56 [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] Add an external testing library for unit tests steadmon
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] common-main: split common_exit() into a new file steadmon
2023-05-18 17:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-14 23:38 ` Splitting common-main (Was: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] common-main: split common_exit() into a new file) Josh Steadmon
2023-07-15 0:34 ` Splitting common-main Junio C Hamano
2023-08-14 13:09 ` Splitting common-main (Was: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] common-main: split common_exit() into a new file) Jeff Hostetler
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/4] unit tests: Add a project plan document steadmon
2023-05-18 13:13 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-18 20:15 ` Glen Choo
2023-05-24 17:40 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-01 9:19 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 3/4] Add C TAP harness steadmon
2023-05-18 13:15 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-18 20:50 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] unit test: add basic example and build rules steadmon
2023-05-18 13:32 ` Phillip Wood
2023-06-09 23:25 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/1] Add a project document for adding unit tests Josh Steadmon
2023-06-09 23:25 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] unit tests: Add a project plan document Josh Steadmon
2023-06-13 22:30 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-06-30 22:18 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-29 19:42 ` Linus Arver
2023-06-29 20:48 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-30 19:31 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-06 18:24 ` Glen Choo
2023-07-06 19:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-06 22:48 ` Glen Choo
2023-06-30 21:33 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-29 21:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-06-30 0:11 ` Linus Arver
2023-06-30 14:07 ` Phillip Wood
2023-06-30 18:47 ` K Wan
2023-06-30 22:35 ` Josh Steadmon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq7cs73sic.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=calvinwan@gmail.com \
--cc=chooglen@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=steadmon@google.com \
--cc=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).