Re: pg/postgres/CI

Chad Woolley
Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:05:28 -0000

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 5:09 AM, Mike Gunderloy <larkware@gmail.com>
wrote:
> One possible resolution would be for us to have both gems available on
> the CI server, and to increase the sophistication of the build script
> to run the AR tests using each one in isolation - I know Chad Woolley
> was looking into this. Another would be for us to declare the older
> postgres gem as unsupported, and to just accept any breaks that happen
> with it - that''s sort of what this swap in the CI setup does, but
> without making any particular note of it. But I''m rather leery of
> having code paths in AR that don''t get tested, especially given
that
> we''ve seen bugs in those code paths recently.

Koz and I discussed this on IRC.  I think his plan was to send an
email to this list indicating plans to deprecate the postgres gem in a
future version.  You just beat him to it :)  The current state is that
geminstaller.yml only contains the pg gem, which imples that is the
''official'' one, even though the code which falls back to
postgres gem
hasn''t been removed yet.

I agree that there should be more sophistication to test other areas
(are there others?) which do this "fallback" alternate gem activation
approach - untested code paths are bad.  Most of the work here will be
in the rake test tasks, to ensure that the proper one is activated
(via a flag, param, etc), then ci_build.rb can have multiple steps to
test both scenarios.

-- Chad