IRC logs for #farmOS, 2019-03-26 (GMT)

2019-03-25
2019-03-27
TimeNickMessage
[20:00:24]* JustTB has joined #farmos
[23:09:02]* JustTB has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
[23:25:00]* JustTB has joined #farmos
[05:58:52]* JustTB has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
[09:46:29]* JustTB has joined #farmos
[11:52:07]<mstenta[m]>paul121: jgaehring and i were talking about testing process for the PY, JS, and PHP libraries...
[11:52:32]<mstenta[m]>And how it might be useful to make a list of "tests" (in a high-level human language sense) that we want all libraries to implement
[11:52:40]<mstenta[m]>these would be things like:
[11:53:03]<mstenta[m]>"create a log with specific name"
[11:53:17]<mstenta[m]>and each library would just need to make sure they have a test for that, implemented however is necessary
[11:53:32]<mstenta[m]>in addition to any other library-specific tests that might be desirable
[16:22:55]<mstenta[m]>Has anyone here heard of this? https://github.com/OpenDroneMap/ODM/blob/master/README.md
[16:23:02]<mstenta[m]>Looks pretty neat!
[16:27:37]<paul121[m]>> And how it might be useful to make a list of "tests" (in a high-level human language sense) that we want all libraries to implement
[16:27:38]<paul121[m]>Agreed!! I'm wondering the best place to document this. On farmOS.org? Under development/API testing? OR a readme.md in a repositories /tests?
[16:28:18]<mstenta[m]>Yea we were wondering that too
[16:28:34]<mstenta[m]>But it would probably make sense to start with some of the tests you've created in farmOS.py
[16:29:09]<paul121[m]>Does having it in GitHub help us? Being able to reference the file in an issue?
[16:29:50]<mstenta[m]>We could start there and move it if we decide to later
[16:31:06]<paul121[m]>> But it would probably make sense to start with some of the tests you've created in farmOS.py
[16:31:07]<paul121[m]>Sure. Right now I'm leveraging the test site in farmier - this would be good to standardize for tests that use log numbers (farm.log.get(56) for example) that way we can ensure log 56 stays in the test site?
[16:32:22]<mstenta[m]>Ah I see
[16:32:39]<mstenta[m]>What if instead: first test creating a log, which will return an ID, then test loading that ID?
[16:33:43]<paul121[m]>Totally! Once we have .send() and .delete() working this will make most sense
[16:35:21]<paul121[m]>I'll start a document outlining tests we should include assuming .get() and .send() are implemented
[16:35:24]<mstenta[m]>ok cool
[16:35:39]<mstenta[m]>oh yea... so delete() is necessary for that jgaehring
[16:36:10]<mstenta[m]>(we postponed delete() in farmOS.js temporarily... need to see if we have budget)
[16:36:26]<mstenta[m]>https://github.com/farmOS/farmOS.js/issues/4
[16:36:56]<mstenta[m]>But farmOS.js doesn't have tests yet, so we'll jsut want to make sure delete() is implemented for that
[16:37:14]<paul121[m]>Ok. Yeah, once we start using .send() we could potentially be creating a lot of logs/assets in the test site
[16:37:52]<paul121[m]>Sounds good. Got to go - but will start documenting tests that I write!
[16:37:55]<mstenta[m]>yea good point
[16:38:00]<mstenta[m]>(or whatever site someone uses for testing)
[16:38:10]<mstenta[m]>Ok thanks @pa
[16:38:22]<mstenta[m]>paul121* :-)
[17:18:12]<jgaehring[m]>Sounds great!
[19:59:44]* JustTB has quit (Quit: Leaving.)