Closed
Bug 1117456
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
Run unit tests on ical.js as well as libical
Categories
(Calendar :: ICAL.js Integration, defect)
Calendar
ICAL.js Integration
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
3.9
People
(Reporter: darktrojan, Assigned: darktrojan)
References
Details
Attachments
(2 files)
2.45 KB,
patch
|
Fallen
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
7.15 KB,
patch
|
Fallen
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
I have a patch to make the XPCShell tests run for both libraries, although there's currently a number of failures when using ical.js. Mostly they are because ical.js returns YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ and the test expects YYYYMMDDThhmmssZ. Not sure if the test should just be adapted to accommodate. There are a few other failures I haven't looked into further.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8543593 [details] [diff] [review] 1117456-1.diff Review of attachment 8543593 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- (In reply to Geoff Lankow (:darktrojan) from comment #0) > I have a patch to make the XPCShell tests run for both libraries, although > there's currently a number of failures when using ical.js. Wow this is a slick solution, I really like it. I always wanted the tests to run, but never though it would be so easy. > > Mostly they are because ical.js returns YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ and the test > expects YYYYMMDDThhmmssZ. Not sure if the test should just be adapted to > accommodate. The wrapper should be adjusted, afaik. ical.js rightfully returns YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ssZ because in jCal we decided this format is more commonly used on the internets. libical, and therefore the rest of Lightning, uses the pure iCalendar format YYYYMMDDThhmmssZ. > > There are a few other failures I haven't looked into further. We should definitely fix them before pushing this patch. There was a time when all tests passed, so we might need some more specific tests that pinpoint issues a little better. I have the feeling our tests are really hard to debug sometimes because they are so broad. ::: calendar/test/unit/xpcshell-icaljs.ini @@ +1,5 @@ > +[DEFAULT] > +head = head_icaljs.js head_consts.js > +tail = > +run-sequentially = Avoid bustage. > +dupe-manifest = What is dupe-manifest? ::: calendar/test/unit/xpcshell-libical.ini @@ +1,4 @@ > +[DEFAULT] > +head = head_consts.js > +tail = > +run-sequentially = Avoid bustage. In another bug we should see if we can remove this line and run the tests in parallel again.
Attachment #8543593 -
Flags: review?(philipp) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
This patch makes some minor adjustments to the tests and the wrapper so that the tests pass. I've also uplifted some changes from ical.js that haven't yet landed on c-c.
Attachment #8543696 -
Flags: review?(philipp)
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8543696 [details] [diff] [review] 1117456-fixes-1.diff Review of attachment 8543696 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Could you also do a try-run with this patch before pushing? ::: calendar/base/backend/icaljs/calICSService.js @@ +30,5 @@ > get parent() this.innerObject.parent, > toString: function() this.innerObject.toICAL(), > > + get value() { > + if (this.innerObject.type == "text") { I re-read the comment in calIICSService, and it seems it should be unescaped not only for text types but also for x- properties. Is this really the case or is that an obsolete assumption? Maybe you could improve the IDL documentation for value and valueAsIcalString so its easier to understand and also add a short inline comment while you are at it?
Attachment #8543696 -
Flags: review?(philipp) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Philipp Kewisch [:Fallen] from comment #4) > I re-read the comment in calIICSService, and it seems it should be unescaped > not only for text types but also for x- properties. Is this really the case > or is that an obsolete assumption? I just did a quick check, and innerObject.type is "text" for x- properties. So this works as expected.
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/6b286c943119 https://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/c92b8904d33e
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → 3.9
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•