255
252
is in the ReStructuredText markup language.
258
Documentation specifically targetted at Bazaar and plugin developers.
255
Documentation specifically targeted at Bazaar and plugin developers.
259
256
(Including this document.)
263
260
Automatically-generated API reference information is available at
264
261
<http://starship.python.net/crew/mwh/bzrlibapi/>.
265
(There is an experimental editable version at
266
<http://starship.python.net/crew/mwh/bzrlibapi-oe/>.)
267
See also the `Essential Domain Classes`_
268
section of this guide.
274
The Importance of Testing
275
=========================
277
Reliability is a critical success factor for any Version Control System.
278
We want Bazaar to be highly reliable across multiple platforms while
279
evolving over time to meet the needs of its community.
281
In a nutshell, this is want we expect and encourage:
283
* New functionality should have test cases. Preferably write the
284
test before writing the code.
286
In general, you can test at either the command-line level or the
287
internal API level. See Writing tests below for more detail.
289
* Try to practice Test-Driven Development: before fixing a bug, write a
290
test case so that it does not regress. Similarly for adding a new
291
feature: write a test case for a small version of the new feature before
292
starting on the code itself. Check the test fails on the old code, then
293
add the feature or fix and check it passes.
295
By doing these things, the Bazaar team gets increased confidence that
296
changes do what they claim to do, whether provided by the core team or
297
by community members. Equally importantly, we can be surer that changes
298
down the track do not break new features or bug fixes that you are
301
As of May 2008, Bazaar ships with a test suite containing over 12000 tests
302
and growing. We are proud of it and want to remain so. As community
303
members, we all benefit from it. Would you trust version control on
304
your project to a product *without* a test suite like Bazaar has?
307
Running the Test Suite
308
======================
310
Currently, bzr selftest is used to invoke tests.
311
You can provide a pattern argument to run a subset. For example,
312
to run just the blackbox tests, run::
314
./bzr selftest -v blackbox
316
To skip a particular test (or set of tests), use the --exclude option
317
(shorthand -x) like so::
319
./bzr selftest -v -x blackbox
321
To ensure that all tests are being run and succeeding, you can use the
322
--strict option which will fail if there are any missing features or known
325
./bzr selftest --strict
327
To list tests without running them, use the --list-only option like so::
329
./bzr selftest --list-only
331
This option can be combined with other selftest options (like -x) and
332
filter patterns to understand their effect.
334
Once you understand how to create a list of tests, you can use the --load-list
335
option to run only a restricted set of tests that you kept in a file, one test
336
id by line. Keep in mind that this will never be sufficient to validate your
337
modifications, you still need to run the full test suite for that, but using it
338
can help in some cases (like running only the failed tests for some time)::
340
./bzr selftest -- load-list my_failing_tests
342
This option can also be combined with other selftest options, including
343
patterns. It has some drawbacks though, the list can become out of date pretty
344
quick when doing Test Driven Development.
346
To address this concern, there is another way to run a restricted set of tests:
347
the --starting-with option will run only the tests whose name starts with the
348
specified string. It will also avoid loading the other tests and as a
349
consequence starts running your tests quicker::
351
./bzr selftest --starting-with bzrlib.blackbox
353
This option can be combined with all the other selftest options including
354
--load-list. The later is rarely used but allows to run a subset of a list of
355
failing tests for example.
357
Test suite debug flags
358
----------------------
360
Similar to the global ``-Dfoo`` debug options, bzr selftest accepts
361
``-E=foo`` debug flags. These flags are:
363
:allow_debug: do *not* clear the global debug flags when running a test.
364
This can provide useful logging to help debug test failures when used
365
with e.g. ``bzr -Dhpss selftest -E=allow_debug``
371
In general tests should be placed in a file named test_FOO.py where
372
FOO is the logical thing under test. That file should be placed in the
373
tests subdirectory under the package being tested.
375
For example, tests for merge3 in bzrlib belong in bzrlib/tests/test_merge3.py.
376
See bzrlib/tests/test_sampler.py for a template test script.
378
Tests can be written for the UI or for individual areas of the library.
379
Choose whichever is appropriate: if adding a new command, or a new command
380
option, then you should be writing a UI test. If you are both adding UI
381
functionality and library functionality, you will want to write tests for
382
both the UI and the core behaviours. We call UI tests 'blackbox' tests
383
and they are found in ``bzrlib/tests/blackbox/*.py``.
385
When writing blackbox tests please honour the following conventions:
387
1. Place the tests for the command 'name' in
388
bzrlib/tests/blackbox/test_name.py. This makes it easy for developers
389
to locate the test script for a faulty command.
391
2. Use the 'self.run_bzr("name")' utility function to invoke the command
392
rather than running bzr in a subprocess or invoking the
393
cmd_object.run() method directly. This is a lot faster than
394
subprocesses and generates the same logging output as running it in a
395
subprocess (which invoking the method directly does not).
263
See also the `Bazaar Architectural Overview
264
<http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/developers/overview.html>`_.
267
The Code Review Process
268
#######################
270
All code changes coming in to Bazaar are reviewed by someone else.
271
Normally changes by core contributors are reviewed by one other core
272
developer, and changes from other people are reviewed by two core
273
developers. Use intelligent discretion if the patch is trivial.
275
Good reviews do take time. They also regularly require a solid
276
understanding of the overall code base. In practice, this means a small
277
number of people often have a large review burden - with knowledge comes
278
responsibility. No one likes their merge requests sitting in a queue going
279
nowhere, so reviewing sooner rather than later is strongly encouraged.
288
Please put a "cover letter" on your merge request explaining:
290
* the reason **why** you're making this change
292
* **how** this change achieves this purpose
294
* anything else you may have fixed in passing
296
* anything significant that you thought of doing, such as a more
297
extensive fix or a different approach, but didn't or couldn't do now
299
A good cover letter makes reviewers' lives easier because they can decide
300
from the letter whether they agree with the purpose and approach, and then
301
assess whether the patch actually does what the cover letter says.
302
Explaining any "drive-by fixes" or roads not taken may also avoid queries
303
from the reviewer. All in all this should give faster and better reviews.
304
Sometimes writing the cover letter helps the submitter realize something
305
else they need to do. The size of the cover letter should be proportional
306
to the size and complexity of the patch.
309
Reviewing proposed changes
310
==========================
312
Anyone is welcome to review code, and reply to the thread with their
315
The simplest way to review a proposed change is to just read the patch on
316
the list or in Bundle Buggy. For more complex changes it may be useful
317
to make a new working tree or branch from trunk, and merge the proposed
318
change into it, so you can experiment with the code or look at a wider
321
There are three main requirements for code to get in:
323
* Doesn't reduce test coverage: if it adds new methods or commands,
324
there should be tests for them. There is a good test framework
325
and plenty of examples to crib from, but if you are having trouble
326
working out how to test something feel free to post a draft patch
329
* Doesn't reduce design clarity, such as by entangling objects
330
we're trying to separate. This is mostly something the more
331
experienced reviewers need to help check.
333
* Improves bugs, features, speed, or code simplicity.
335
Code that goes in should not degrade any of these aspects. Patches are
336
welcome that only cleanup the code without changing the external
337
behaviour. The core developers take care to keep the code quality high
338
and understandable while recognising that perfect is sometimes the enemy
341
It is easy for reviews to make people notice other things which should be
342
fixed but those things should not hold up the original fix being accepted.
343
New things can easily be recorded in the Bug Tracker instead.
345
It's normally much easier to review several smaller patches than one large
346
one. You might want to use ``bzr-loom`` to maintain threads of related
347
work, or submit a preparatory patch that will make your "real" change
351
Checklist for reviewers
352
=======================
354
* Do you understand what the code's doing and why?
356
* Will it perform reasonably for large inputs, both in memory size and
357
run time? Are there some scenarios where performance should be
360
* Is it tested, and are the tests at the right level? Are there both
361
blackbox (command-line level) and API-oriented tests?
363
* If this change will be visible to end users or API users, is it
364
appropriately documented in NEWS?
366
* Does it meet the coding standards below?
368
* If it changes the user-visible behaviour, does it update the help
369
strings and user documentation?
371
* If it adds a new major concept or standard practice, does it update the
372
developer documentation?
374
* (your ideas here...)
380
From May 2009 on, we prefer people to propose code reviews through
383
* <https://launchpad.net/+tour/code-review>
385
* <https://help.launchpad.net/Code/Review>
387
Anyone can propose or comment on a merge proposal just by creating a
390
There are two ways to create a new merge proposal: through the web
391
interface or by email.
394
Proposing a merge through the web
395
---------------------------------
397
To create the proposal through the web, first push your branch to Launchpad.
398
For example, a branch dealing with documentation belonging to the Launchpad
399
User mbp could be pushed as ::
401
bzr push lp:~mbp/bzr/doc
403
Then go to the branch's web page, which in this case would be
404
<https://code.launchpad.net/~mbp/bzr/doc>. You can simplify this step by just
397
3. Only test the one command in a single test script. Use the bzrlib
398
library when setting up tests and when evaluating the side-effects of
399
the command. We do this so that the library api has continual pressure
400
on it to be as functional as the command line in a simple manner, and
401
to isolate knock-on effects throughout the blackbox test suite when a
402
command changes its name or signature. Ideally only the tests for a
403
given command are affected when a given command is changed.
405
4. If you have a test which does actually require running bzr in a
406
subprocess you can use ``run_bzr_subprocess``. By default the spawned
407
process will not load plugins unless ``--allow-plugins`` is supplied.
413
We make selective use of doctests__. In general they should provide
414
*examples* within the API documentation which can incidentally be tested. We
415
don't try to test every important case using doctests -- regular Python
416
tests are generally a better solution.
418
Most of these are in ``bzrlib/doc/api``. More additions are welcome.
420
__ http://docs.python.org/lib/module-doctest.html
423
Skipping tests and test requirements
424
------------------------------------
426
In our enhancements to unittest we allow for some addition results beyond
427
just success or failure.
429
If a test can't be run, it can say that it's skipped. This is typically
430
used in parameterized tests - for example if a transport doesn't support
431
setting permissions, we'll skip the tests that relating to that. ::
434
return self.branch_format.initialize(repo.bzrdir)
435
except errors.UninitializableFormat:
436
raise tests.TestSkipped('Uninitializable branch format')
438
Raising TestSkipped is a good idea when you want to make it clear that the
439
test was not run, rather than just returning which makes it look as if it
442
Several different cases are distinguished:
445
Generic skip; the only type that was present up to bzr 0.18.
448
The test doesn't apply to the parameters with which it was run.
449
This is typically used when the test is being applied to all
450
implementations of an interface, but some aspects of the interface
451
are optional and not present in particular concrete
452
implementations. (Some tests that should raise this currently
453
either silently return or raise TestSkipped.) Another option is
454
to use more precise parameterization to avoid generating the test
458
**(Not implemented yet)**
459
The test can't be run because of an inherent limitation of the
460
environment, such as not having symlinks or not supporting
464
The test can't be run because a dependency (typically a Python
465
library) is not available in the test environment. These
466
are in general things that the person running the test could fix
467
by installing the library. It's OK if some of these occur when
468
an end user runs the tests or if we're specifically testing in a
469
limited environment, but a full test should never see them.
472
The test exists but is known to fail, for example because the
473
code to fix it hasn't been run yet. Raising this allows
474
you to distinguish these failures from the ones that are not
475
expected to fail. This could be conditionally raised if something
476
is broken on some platforms but not on others.
478
We plan to support three modes for running the test suite to control the
479
interpretation of these results. Strict mode is for use in situations
480
like merges to the mainline and releases where we want to make sure that
481
everything that can be tested has been tested. Lax mode is for use by
482
developers who want to temporarily tolerate some known failures. The
483
default behaviour is obtained by ``bzr selftest`` with no options, and
484
also (if possible) by running under another unittest harness.
486
======================= ======= ======= ========
487
result strict default lax
488
======================= ======= ======= ========
489
TestSkipped pass pass pass
490
TestNotApplicable pass pass pass
491
TestPlatformLimit pass pass pass
492
TestDependencyMissing fail pass pass
493
KnownFailure fail pass pass
494
======================= ======= ======= ========
497
Test feature dependencies
409
You can then click "Propose for merging into another branch", and enter your
410
cover letter (see above) into the web form. Typically you'll want to merge
411
into ``~bzr/bzr/trunk`` which will be the default; you might also want to
412
nominate merging into a release branch for a bug fix. There is the option to
413
specify a specific reviewer or type of review, and you shouldn't normally
416
Submitting the form takes you to the new page about the merge proposal
417
containing the diff of the changes, comments by interested people, and
418
controls to comment or vote on the change.
420
Proposing a merge by mail
498
421
-------------------------
500
Rather than manually checking the environment in each test, a test class
501
can declare its dependence on some test features. The feature objects are
502
checked only once for each run of the whole test suite.
504
For historical reasons, as of May 2007 many cases that should depend on
505
features currently raise TestSkipped.)
509
class TestStrace(TestCaseWithTransport):
511
_test_needs_features = [StraceFeature]
513
This means all tests in this class need the feature. The feature itself
514
should provide a ``_probe`` method which is called once to determine if
517
These should generally be equivalent to either TestDependencyMissing or
518
sometimes TestPlatformLimit.
524
Known failures are when a test exists but we know it currently doesn't
525
work, allowing the test suite to still pass. These should be used with
526
care, we don't want a proliferation of quietly broken tests. It might be
527
appropriate to use them if you've committed a test for a bug but not the
528
fix for it, or if something works on Unix but not on Windows.
531
Testing exceptions and errors
532
-----------------------------
534
It's important to test handling of errors and exceptions. Because this
535
code is often not hit in ad-hoc testing it can often have hidden bugs --
536
it's particularly common to get NameError because the exception code
537
references a variable that has since been renamed.
539
.. TODO: Something about how to provoke errors in the right way?
541
In general we want to test errors at two levels:
543
1. A test in ``test_errors.py`` checking that when the exception object is
544
constructed with known parameters it produces an expected string form.
545
This guards against mistakes in writing the format string, or in the
546
``str`` representations of its parameters. There should be one for
547
each exception class.
549
2. Tests that when an api is called in a particular situation, it raises
550
an error of the expected class. You should typically use
551
``assertRaises``, which in the Bazaar test suite returns the exception
552
object to allow you to examine its parameters.
554
In some cases blackbox tests will also want to check error reporting. But
555
it can be difficult to provoke every error through the commandline
556
interface, so those tests are only done as needed -- eg in response to a
557
particular bug or if the error is reported in an unusual way(?) Blackbox
558
tests should mostly be testing how the command-line interface works, so
559
should only test errors if there is something particular to the cli in how
560
they're displayed or handled.
566
The Python ``warnings`` module is used to indicate a non-fatal code
567
problem. Code that's expected to raise a warning can be tested through
570
The test suite can be run with ``-Werror`` to check no unexpected errors
573
However, warnings should be used with discretion. It's not an appropriate
574
way to give messages to the user, because the warning is normally shown
575
only once per source line that causes the problem. You should also think
576
about whether the warning is serious enought that it should be visible to
577
users who may not be able to fix it.
580
Interface implementation testing and test scenarios
581
---------------------------------------------------
583
There are several cases in Bazaar of multiple implementations of a common
584
conceptual interface. ("Conceptual" because
585
it's not necessary for all the implementations to share a base class,
586
though they often do.) Examples include transports and the working tree,
587
branch and repository classes.
589
In these cases we want to make sure that every implementation correctly
590
fulfils the interface requirements. For example, every Transport should
591
support the ``has()`` and ``get()`` and ``clone()`` methods. We have a
592
sub-suite of tests in ``test_transport_implementations``. (Most
593
per-implementation tests are in submodules of ``bzrlib.tests``, but not
594
the transport tests at the moment.)
596
These tests are repeated for each registered Transport, by generating a
597
new TestCase instance for the cross product of test methods and transport
598
implementations. As each test runs, it has ``transport_class`` and
599
``transport_server`` set to the class it should test. Most tests don't
600
access these directly, but rather use ``self.get_transport`` which returns
601
a transport of the appropriate type.
603
The goal is to run per-implementation only tests that relate to that
604
particular interface. Sometimes we discover a bug elsewhere that happens
605
with only one particular transport. Once it's isolated, we can consider
606
whether a test should be added for that particular implementation,
607
or for all implementations of the interface.
609
The multiplication of tests for different implementations is normally
610
accomplished by overriding the ``test_suite`` function used to load
611
tests from a module. This function typically loads all the tests,
612
then applies a TestProviderAdapter to them, which generates a longer
613
suite containing all the test variations.
619
Some utilities are provided for generating variations of tests. This can
620
be used for per-implementation tests, or other cases where the same test
621
code needs to run several times on different scenarios.
623
The general approach is to define a class that provides test methods,
624
which depend on attributes of the test object being pre-set with the
625
values to which the test should be applied. The test suite should then
626
also provide a list of scenarios in which to run the tests.
628
Typically ``multiply_tests_from_modules`` should be called from the test
629
module's ``test_suite`` function.
632
Essential Domain Classes
633
########################
635
Introducing the Object Model
423
To propose a merge by mail, send a bundle to ``merge@code.launchpad.net``.
425
You can generate a merge request like this::
427
bzr send -o bug-1234.diff
429
``bzr send`` can also send mail directly if you prefer; see the help.
434
From <https://code.launchpad.net/bzr/+activereviews> you can see all
435
currently active reviews, and choose one to comment on. This page also
436
shows proposals that are now approved and should be merged by someone with
440
Reviews through Bundle Buggy
636
441
============================
638
The core domain objects within the bazaar model are:
648
Transports are explained below. See http://bazaar-vcs.org/Classes/
649
for an introduction to the other key classes.
654
The ``Transport`` layer handles access to local or remote directories.
655
Each Transport object acts like a logical connection to a particular
656
directory, and it allows various operations on files within it. You can
657
*clone* a transport to get a new Transport connected to a subdirectory or
660
Transports are not used for access to the working tree. At present
661
working trees are always local and they are accessed through the regular
662
Python file io mechanisms.
667
Transports work in URLs. Take note that URLs are by definition only
668
ASCII - the decision of how to encode a Unicode string into a URL must be
669
taken at a higher level, typically in the Store. (Note that Stores also
670
escape filenames which cannot be safely stored on all filesystems, but
671
this is a different level.)
673
The main reason for this is that it's not possible to safely roundtrip a
674
URL into Unicode and then back into the same URL. The URL standard
675
gives a way to represent non-ASCII bytes in ASCII (as %-escapes), but
676
doesn't say how those bytes represent non-ASCII characters. (They're not
677
guaranteed to be UTF-8 -- that is common but doesn't happen everywhere.)
679
For example if the user enters the url ``http://example/%e0`` there's no
680
way to tell whether that character represents "latin small letter a with
681
grave" in iso-8859-1, or "latin small letter r with acute" in iso-8859-2
682
or malformed UTF-8. So we can't convert their URL to Unicode reliably.
684
Equally problematic if we're given a url-like string containing non-ascii
685
characters (such as the accented a) we can't be sure how to convert that
686
to the correct URL, because we don't know what encoding the server expects
687
for those characters. (Although this is not totally reliable we might still
688
accept these and assume they should be put into UTF-8.)
690
A similar edge case is that the url ``http://foo/sweet%2Fsour`` contains
691
one directory component whose name is "sweet/sour". The escaped slash is
692
not a directory separator. If we try to convert URLs to regular Unicode
693
paths this information will be lost.
695
This implies that Transports must natively deal with URLs; for simplicity
696
they *only* deal with URLs and conversion of other strings to URLs is done
697
elsewhere. Information they return, such as from ``list_dir``, is also in
698
the form of URL components.
443
The Bundle Buggy tool used up to May 2009 is still available as a review
446
Sending patches for review
447
--------------------------
449
If you'd like to propose a change, please post to the
450
bazaar@lists.canonical.com list with a bundle, patch, or link to a
451
branch. Put ``[PATCH]`` or ``[MERGE]`` in the subject so Bundle Buggy
452
can pick it out, and explain the change in the email message text.
453
Remember to update the NEWS file as part of your change if it makes any
454
changes visible to users or plugin developers. Please include a diff
455
against mainline if you're giving a link to a branch.
457
You can generate a merge request like this::
459
bzr send -o bug-1234.patch
461
A ``.patch`` extension is recommended instead of .bundle as many mail clients
462
will send the latter as a binary file.
464
``bzr send`` can also send mail directly if you prefer; see the help.
466
Please do **NOT** put [PATCH] or [MERGE] in the subject line if you don't
467
want it to be merged. If you want comments from developers rather than
468
to be merged, you can put ``[RFC]`` in the subject line.
470
If this change addresses a bug, please put the bug number in the subject
471
line too, in the form ``[#1]`` so that Bundle Buggy can recognize it.
473
If the change is intended for a particular release mark that in the
474
subject too, e.g. ``[1.6]``.
475
Anyone can "vote" on the mailing list by expressing an opinion. Core
476
developers can also vote using Bundle Buggy. Here are the voting codes and
479
:approve: Reviewer wants this submission merged.
480
:tweak: Reviewer wants this submission merged with small changes. (No
482
:abstain: Reviewer does not intend to vote on this patch.
483
:resubmit: Please make changes and resubmit for review.
484
:reject: Reviewer doesn't want this kind of change merged.
485
:comment: Not really a vote. Reviewer just wants to comment, for now.
487
If a change gets two approvals from core reviewers, and no rejections,
488
then it's OK to come in. Any of the core developers can bring it into the
489
bzr.dev trunk and backport it to maintenance branches if required. The
490
Release Manager will merge the change into the branch for a pending
491
release, if any. As a guideline, core developers usually merge their own
492
changes and volunteer to merge other contributions if they were the second
493
reviewer to agree to a change.
495
To track the progress of proposed changes, use Bundle Buggy. See
496
http://bundlebuggy.aaronbentley.com/help for a link to all the
497
outstanding merge requests together with an explanation of the columns.
498
Bundle Buggy will also mail you a link to track just your change.
701
500
Coding Style Guidelines
702
501
#######################
added
removed
doc/developers/HACKING.txt
