On 18.07.2011, at 17:23, Ben Coman wrote:

> Colin Putney wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>>   
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I ran the snippet below in a freshly downloaded trunk image. It found a couple of differences:
>>> 
>>> - Monticello is dirty because of the Mock category
>>> - FlexibleVocabularies is dirty because its empty -Info category was removed
>>> - Collections is dirty because there is an unpackaged method, WeakRegistry class>>migrateOldRegistries
>>> 
>>> These discrepancies should be corrected before the release, but does anybody have an idea why this happened?
>>>     
>> 
>> Well, the first one is easy - running Monticello's test suite will
>> dirty the package. This is a hassle, but I haven't found a way to
>> prevent it that's not even more of a hassle. If you try to look at the
>> changes, it'll tell you there aren't any and mark the package clean.
>> 
>> Colin
>>   
> This is a naive question - I'm just fishing to understand more about the process...
> Would you not make a copy of trunk on the server to run the Monitecello tests against, that is thrown away after the tests?  
> For example, served up from http://testsource.squeak.com/trunk.  
> Depending on your host operating system that could be a shallow copy-on-write copy.


Look at the Monticello tests - they do not use any actual repository, but mockups.

- Bert -

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20110718/dc40bb89/attachment.htm