Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 2, 2021. It is now read-only.

[DO NOT MERGE] swarm-network-rewrite merge to master #171

Closed
wants to merge 959 commits into from

Conversation

gbalint
Copy link

@gbalint gbalint commented Dec 14, 2017

swarm-network-rewrite is a long-living development branch which contains the network rewrite project code until it is feature complete.

This PR is just for reference, to see how complex it will be to merge when we are ready.

@cobordism cobordism added this to the 0.3 milestone Jan 10, 2018
@gbalint gbalint force-pushed the swarm-network-rewrite branch 2 times, most recently from 70d231b to c38007a Compare January 17, 2018 09:57
@gbalint gbalint added the master label Jan 25, 2018
@nonsense
Copy link
Contributor

Looking at https://travis-ci.org/ethersphere/go-ethereum/jobs/343431371 , I guess we have a deadlock in the les tests, considering that github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/les package is supposed to be under test when the job times out.

@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ var debugMode = false
var prevTime time.Time
var cntPrev int

func TestSimulation(t *testing.T) {
func XTestSimulation(t *testing.T) {
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is the difference?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@gluk256 the X is disabling tests, similar to t.Skip() - we disabled a few flaky tests on this branch so that we focus on our swarm test failures while we are developing the swarm-network-rewrite project.

Once this gets to merge to ethereum/go-ethereum parent repo, we will revert those, and I believe you probably would have solved any flakes by then.

@@ -951,7 +953,7 @@ func worker(id int, jobs <-chan Job, rpcs map[discover.NodeID]*rpc.Client, pubke
// nodes/msgs/addrbytes/adaptertype
// if adaptertype is exec uses execadapter, simadapter otherwise
func TestNetwork2000(t *testing.T) {
//testutil.EnableMetrics()
//enableMetrics()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

remove comment?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wouldn't that be better with a flag then

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IDEs are hard to configure to use custom flags for every test, I personally find it easier to uncomment the line.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am fine with this, but I have had comments on my PRs to have such comments removed. Maybe we should discuss it in a roundtable?

Copy link
Contributor

@nonsense nonsense Jun 14, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@holisticode sure, let's discuss this. I agree in general that we should not keep dead code, especially in the production code, however I already removed this once from tests, and then we had to introduce it yet again with @nolash . I also think this specific line will be helpful for other tests in the future.

I have definitely been against dead code in the production code in the past, and if you feel strongly that this is the same, I will be happy to remove it! :)

On a second thought adding it as a flag is also a possibility, I could just have a custom keybinding triggering with the flag :)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No strong feelings, just aiming at consistent handling.

@nonsense
Copy link
Contributor

nonsense commented Jun 14, 2018 via email

@holisticode
Copy link
Contributor

Check: conflicting files it seems

@cobordism cobordism modified the milestones: 0.3 breaking changes, 0.3.1 Jun 22, 2018
@cobordism cobordism closed this Jun 22, 2018
@nonsense nonsense deleted the swarm-network-rewrite branch July 8, 2019 08:19
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.