[theme-reviewers] Theme Unit Tests on GitHub?

Emil Uzelac emil at uzelac.me
Fri Oct 10 17:24:35 UTC 2014

List is far from perfect and not the best way how we should communicate.
The plan was to move over and do this from make.wordpress.org/themes but I
have no idea what happened to that.

Too many opinions I guess.

Couple of months ago I proposed to centralize but ...

On Friday, October 10, 2014, Gary Jones <gary at gamajo.com> wrote:

> Sorry if I got the mailing list bit wrong. I was on digest, but just
> turned it off. If nothing else, it shows what a barrier it is for potential
> contributors like myself who want to contribute to improving the quality of
> the Unit Tests, but not be a part of the wider TRT.
> I did join this list a year or so ago and highlighted a few different
> problems with the Unit Tests that you then fixed. I've got no idea what
> they were, and nor would anyone else, unless they knew what to search for
> and when. A public repo (GitHub, BitBucket, Trac SVN) with associated
> Issues / Tickets would mean all future information is consolidated in one
> place, not tucked within a mailing list archive.
> I saw the discussion about administration / owner of the WPTRT account on
> GitHub. In the short term, if given Lance's agreement, the tests could be
> put under anyone's individual account (or even Automattic's) and moved over
> to WPTRT once that team account has been sorted out. Whilst it might be
> nice to do the SVN to Git transfer properly to keep the commit history, I'm
> not sure if that necessarily gives any long term value.
> I realise the files for wptest.io is not an official version, and I meant
> to imply that it had been forked from the official tests some time ago,
> before each branch separately added different fixes and improvements, such
> that merging might produce too many conflicts.
> --
> Gary Jones
> Web Developer, Gamajo Tech
> On 10 October 2014 17:39, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','emil at uzelac.me');>> wrote:
>> Gary you replied on digest I copied what you wrote last:
>> ----------------
>> That's exactly my point which I didn't seem to communicate well enough.
>> Contributors want to write code or make amendments with the tools that are
>> already familiar with, not have to subscribe to a mailing list and submit
>> changes that way.
>> And by not creating tickets, again, no-one has any record of what changes
>> have been mentioned,  awaiting review or fixed. Searching through mailing
>> list archives is really not the most productive of anyone's time.
>> --
>> Gary Jones
>> -----------------------
>> There could be more to it and please don't think of me as someone who
>> blocks this I am merely echoing what was said in the past. If Lance is
>> in agreement case closed :)
>> Emil
>> On Friday, October 10, 2014, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','emil at uzelac.me');>> wrote:
>>> Accessible by Lance, Chip, me and few others. There's not much to see
>>> anyway :)
>>> On Friday, October 10, 2014, Ulrich Pogson <grapplerulrich at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> > N.B we track the history with page/post revisions :)
>>>> @Emil is this information public?
>>>> On 10 October 2014 17:11, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>>>>> N.B we track the history with page/post revisions :)
>>>>> On Friday, October 10, 2014, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>>>>>> Not really sure what would be the point of that to be honest. Anyone
>>>>>> can freely obtain an official copy and ping us here with the changes.
>>>>>> Creating a ticket is also not needed. We can handle all at one place,
>>>>>> which is right here.
>>>>>> And again this is @Lance's call :)
>>>>>> On Friday, October 10, 2014, Tammie Lister <karmatosed at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>  I think having it (not forked) but accessible on GH could be good.
>>>>>>> We don't have to fork just to put on GH and for the record, I never
>>>>>>> suggested it was forked :)
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Tammie Lister
>>>>>>> On 10/10/2014 15:56, Emil Uzelac wrote:
>>>>>>> I don't think we need to fork the unit. WPTest is not official copy
>>>>>>> or the same as ours. If you wish to improve, please by all means. Just ping
>>>>>>> me and I will go over the changes and make the update.
>>>>>>>  Unless @Lance thinks that this is ok to do, but I doubt that
>>>>>>> because someone tried few times already.
>>>>>>> On Friday, October 10, 2014, Gary Jones <gary at gamajo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>>>>  tl;dr:
>>>>>>>> 1. Could the theme unit tests file be put on public repo on GitHub?
>>>>>>>> 2. Anyone want to help tackle
>>>>>>>> https://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/22279 ?
>>>>>>>>  Posting after Tammie suggested I do.
>>>>>>>>  I'd like to see The Theme Unit Tests file on GitHub for the
>>>>>>>> following reasons:
>>>>>>>>  * Access to commit history to see what exactly has changed version
>>>>>>>> to version. Currently, us mere mortals can only see when it was updated -
>>>>>>>> the information about what was not updated is not available (or not easy to
>>>>>>>> find) as it's part of Automattic's SVN repo.
>>>>>>>>  * Easier to see already-reported bugs and enhancements, rather
>>>>>>>> than wading through the mailing list archives.
>>>>>>>>  There's a fork already on GH (https://github.com/manovotny/wptest)
>>>>>>>> which claims to have added extra edge cases. But I've currently got no idea
>>>>>>>> which cases these are, and why they weren't added to the original Tests
>>>>>>>> file. Michael also believes that further cases and fixes may have been
>>>>>>>> added to the official Tests since the fork that aren't in his, so now we
>>>>>>>> may have two sets of tests, mostly but not completely duplicated.
>>>>>>>> If the official Tests were on GH, and open to pull requests on
>>>>>>>> those edge cases and other issues, then I'd hope that wptest could be
>>>>>>>> discontinued to just leave a single more-complete test suite that everyone
>>>>>>>> can benefit from.
>>>>>>>> The wptest file has fixed things like
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/manovotny/wptest/issues/27 (s/Isaac
>>>>>>>> Newton/Albert Einstein) and
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/manovotny/wptest/issues/24
>>>>>>>> (s/Horizontal/Vertical on vertical featured image alt text) which the
>>>>>>>> official Tests are still bugged with. Both tests are bugged with missing
>>>>>>>> markup formatting tests for some elements,
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/manovotny/wptest/issues/37 (s/Headers/Headings)
>>>>>>>> and a side-effect of https://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/29621
>>>>>>>> (post titles stripped of markup on export).
>>>>>>>> One of the things that would make contributions *considerably*
>>>>>>>> easier would be to get https://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/22279
>>>>>>>> (mixed line endings for XML vs cdata in export) fixed. That would enable
>>>>>>>> direct editing of the file without breaking line-endings, without having to
>>>>>>>> set up a clean WP install, import, amend and export. If anyone has
>>>>>>>> experience of the Exporter and could help on this, then I would personally
>>>>>>>> be grateful, as would potential GitHub contributors :-)
>>>>>>>>  Gary
>>>>>>>>   --
>>>>>>>> Gary Jones
>>>>>>>> Web Developer, Gamajo Tech
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing listtheme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.orghttp://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> Tammie Lister
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org');>
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20141010/548902fc/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list