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

Report warnings #72

Open
1 task
jyutzler opened this issue Jun 22, 2018 · 13 comments
Open
1 task

Report warnings #72

jyutzler opened this issue Jun 22, 2018 · 13 comments

Comments

@jyutzler
Copy link
Contributor

jyutzler commented Jun 22, 2018

In a few places, we want to report warnings. It is unclear to me how to do this through the interface.

@lgoltz
Copy link
Contributor

lgoltz commented Aug 20, 2018

Currently it is only possible to pass, fail or skip a test.

Warnings can be logged only in the application log.

@jyutzler
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'd like to escalate this. The inability to post a warning has a significant impact in our ability to inform the users of these tests.

@ghobona
Copy link
Contributor

ghobona commented Nov 17, 2020

@keshav-nangare @dstenger There is a log.xml file that is generated by each ETS. Could we use that to log warnings into?

@dstenger
Copy link
Contributor

If we write the warning into the log file it is probably hard for non-technical users to find them.

@jyutzler What is the exact purpose of the warnings? Shall they be displayed in the HTML report?

@jyutzler
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, I would certainly like for warnings to be displayed in the HTML report. I wouldn't want a GeoPackage flagged with one or more warnings to fail certification, but I also would want responsible organizations to strive to achieve GeoPackages that don't have warnings.

@dstenger
Copy link
Contributor

I propose to use a skip result for warnings. A skipped test does not cause an implementation to fail the test suite but a skip is also not a successfully passed test.
The message of the skip might be something like: "WARNING: Some text."

@dstenger
Copy link
Contributor

@jyutzler What do you think of this proposal?

@jyutzler
Copy link
Contributor Author

While I do think it would be useful to report on the reason a test was skipped (not requested, no relevant data, etc.), I think this is semantically quite different from a warning. This approach will not allow us to express the message we want to express.

@dstenger
Copy link
Contributor

dstenger commented Dec 7, 2020

Currently, it is not possible to configure a text when a test passes. Would it help you if we enable that? Then you could configure something like "WARNING: Some text." for your specific case.

Can you please give us an exact example including the actual message?

@jyutzler
Copy link
Contributor Author

jyutzler commented Dec 22, 2020

RTree:

WARNING: the trigger rtree_<t>_<c>_update3 is invalid. Please see http://www.geopackage.org/spec121/#_define_triggers_to_maintain_spatial_index_values for more information.

Once we have proven the concept, we will provide additional instances.

@dstenger
Copy link
Contributor

dstenger commented Jan 5, 2021

@keshav-nangare Can you please check if such messages (#72 (comment)) can be printed by the HTML report of TEAM Engine?
I propose to rename field "Reason of Failure:" to "Details:" and to print the message there. This should be discussed with @ghobona.

@ghobona
Copy link
Contributor

ghobona commented Jan 28, 2021

@dstenger @keshav-nangare Yes, I am happy for you to rename the field to "Details".

@ghobona ghobona removed their assignment Jan 28, 2021
@dstenger
Copy link
Contributor

dstenger commented Feb 10, 2021

@keshav-nangare

Can you please check if SoftAssert of TestNG framework can be used?

Steps for implementation:

  1. Enhance TEAM Engine to be capable to print warnings/ SoftAssert and rename column "Reason of Failure:" to "Details:".
  2. Enhance this test suite to throw a warning (demo).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Needs discussion
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants