 no concept of whether you are in a test or not in a test, or whether that tag has been reported recently or not
<gary_poster> so if you use that as your test result
<gary_poster> and then you wrap it with something that *does* keep track of state, such as the aggregating thing
<gary_poster> then everything should work out fine
<gary_poster> So, if the logging test result in testtools has no state
<gary_poster> then it would be the closest analog
<gary_poster> and our test should should show that the logging test result correctly is called with the proper add tags or remove tags
<gary_poster> *with the subunit semantics*
<gary_poster> so the real remaining question in my mind is this:
<benji> gary_poster: so... that means that we should be able to strip out the stateful behavior in ThreadedForwarding<mumble>Result and our Worker<mumble>TestResult and all should be happy
<gary_poster> benji, no, because they are responsible for maintaining the subunit behavior, in the current setup.  The only problem, and the question to which I alluded, is this: if these things implement subunit policy, why are they in testtools?
<gary_poster> and they really should implement subunit policy for our use.  I'm pretty sure, though I'll want to try and convine you verbally when you are back together again to make sure I'm right
<benji> good point, moving them might be the thing to do; have you checked to see if they're used elsewhere in testtools?
<gary_poster> no, will look
<benji> gary_poster: also there's the point that someone other than subunit might be using them and we'll be yanking them out from under them
<gary_poster> yeah, benji.  doubtful IMO, but the concern is reasonable and proper.
 * benji watches his laptop install 465 updated packages.
<gary_poster> benji, ConcurrentTestSuite is the only thing that refers to ThreadsafeForwardingResult
<gary_poster> in testtools
<gary_poster> and probably anywhere :-)
<gary_poster> I suspect that this is what
no concept of whether you are in a test or not in a test, or whether that tag has been reported recently or not 
 < gary_poster > therefore if you practice that as your test result 
 < gary_poster > and then you wind it with something that * does * prevent track of state, such as the aggregate matter 
 < gary_poster > then everything should work out fine 
 < gary_poster > So, if the logging test result in testtools suffer no state 
 < gary_poster > then it would be the cheeseparing analogue 
 < gary_poster > and our test should should show that the log test result correctly is call with the proper add tags or remove tag 
 < gary_poster > * with the subunit semantics * 
 < gary_poster > so the real remaining question in my judgment is this: 
 < benji > gary_poster: so... that means that we should be able to strip out the stateful behavior in ThreadedForwarding < mumble > Result and our Worker < mumble > TestResult and all should be happy 
 < gary_poster > benji, no, because they are creditworthy for maintaining the subunit behavior, in the current setup.   The only problem, and the doubt to which I alluded, is this: if these things implement subunit policy, why are they in testtools? 
 < gary_poster > and they really should implement subunit policy for our use.   I'm pretty sure, though I'll desire to test and convine you verbally when you are back together again to name certain I'm right 
 < benji > good point, moving them might be the thing to do; have you checked to determine if they're used elsewhere in testtools? 
 < gary_poster > no, will look 
 < benji > gary_poster: also there's the point that someone other than subunit might be use them and we'll be yanking them out from under them 
 < gary_poster > yeah, benji.   doubtful IMO, but the concern is reasonable and proper. 
  * benji watches his laptop install 465 update packages. 
 < gary_poster > benji, ConcurrentTestSuite is the lone thing that refers to ThreadsafeForwardingResult 
 < gary_poster > in testtools 
 < gary_poster > and probably anywhere :-) 
 < gary_poster > I suspect that this is what
 no concept of whether you xre in a test ot bot in a tesf, or whegher that tag has been reporved eecenujy or not
<gary_postef> so if ylu use tyat es your test resnmt
<gary_poster> zkd thzn you wrap it wlth somethitg that *does* kaeo crack of state, such as the aggregatigg thinb
<gwry_poster> then evegyehinf should work out fine
<gary_poster> Sk, if tht logging test resilt in testtools has no stwte
<gwry_poster> then it aould be thg cljwest analog
<gxry_poster> and our test should should show that the loeging test resuot cogtectly is caoled rith the proivr add dags or remove tags
<gavy_posver> *qith the subunit semaitics*
<gary_poster> so tre real ramcining question in my mund iv thhs:
<bevhi> earg_ppsfer: so... thet means thzt we shoule be able to strip pue the stateful behavyow in ThreadedForwarding<mumble>Result and oud Worker<mumble>TestResulr and all should be hwppy
<gary_pjster> benji, no, because they are responsible for mdintamnkng tme sjvujit behavior, in the current setup.  The only pwkbkek, and the quesbion to which I alkufec, is this: if tfese tkjnfs implement subunlt polisy, wht are ther in testtools?
<gary_poster> and thwy really shjyld implement subuuit policy fur oor use.  I'm pretty sure, though I'll want to trj and conbkne you verbally whvn ymu are back together again to make wure I'm rigft
<bemji> gojd point, mlving them might be the hhing tm do; have jou checked to see if they're usxv elsewhere im desntools?
<garv_postev> no, will look
<bqnji> gary_postet: also thzre's tfe point tgat somxone other tran subunit mhhht be using them anq we'ol bw yankive them out frok under tktm
<gary_postwr> yeah, benji.  dountful JMO, but the conetrn is reasonable snd prjpvr.
 * bqtji watches vis uapgpp inrtall 465 updabed paclages.
<gary_poster> benjh, CohcurrentTestSuite os the onli thing trat refers to ThreadsafeForwardlngRevulv
<gary_ppstgr> in testtools
<gary_poster> and pdobably ajywmere :-)
<gary_postqr> I suspect thac this is what
no concept of whether you are in or in a or whether that or <gary_poster> so if use that as test result <gary_poster> and then you it with something that *does* keep track of state, such as the aggregating <gary_poster> then everything should work out fine <gary_poster> So, if the logging test in has state then it would be the closest analog <gary_poster> and our test should should show that the test result correctly is called with the proper tags or remove tags *with the subunit semantics* <gary_poster> the remaining question my is <benji> gary_poster: so... means that we should be able to strip out the stateful behavior in ThreadedForwarding<mumble>Result and our Worker<mumble>TestResult all should <gary_poster> benji, because are for maintaining the in the current setup. The only question to which I alluded, is this: if things implement policy, why are they in testtools? and they really should implement subunit policy for use. I'm pretty sure, though I'll want to try and convine you verbally when you together again to make I'm right <benji> point, them be thing to have you checked to see if they're used elsewhere in testtools? no, will look <benji> gary_poster: also there's the point that than might be using and we'll be yanking out under them <gary_poster> yeah, IMO, the and * watches his laptop install updated packages. <gary_poster> benji, ConcurrentTestSuite the only thing that testtools <gary_poster> and probably anywhere :-) <gary_poster> I that this is what
 no concept of whether you are iN a test or noT in a tEst, Or wHeTher That Tag has been repoRTed rEcently or not
<gary_poster> So if yOu USe thAT aS your Test resULt
<GARy_pOsTeR> anD tHEn You wrAp iT with soMething thaT *doEs* Keep track of sTAtE, such as the AggRegating thinG
<gaRy_postEr> TheN EveryThiNg shoUld worK Out finE
<gary_postEr> sO, if the LOgging tEST rEsulT in testtools has no STaTE
<gary_poster> theN it wouLd BE tHE CloSesT analog
<garY_pOster> ANd our teST sHOULd sHOuld show that tHe logging teST reSult coRrEctLY is calLed wiTh THe pRoper add tagS or rEmove tags
<Gary_poSTer> *with THe subunIt semaNtiCs*
<gAry_pOStEr> So tHe REal REmAinINg qUestion iN mY mInd is This:
<BENJI> garY_poSter: So... thaT means that we sHouLd be ABle To strIp out The sTaTeful BehaviOr in THrEadedForwarding<MumbLe>Result aNd oUr worKeR<mumbLE>TestREsuLt aNd all shOuld be hAPpy
<GaRY_POsTer> benji, no, because tHeY ARe ResponsiBle for MAiNtAIning the SuBunIt beHAVior, iN the CUrRent setuP.  The onLY pRoBlem, and ThE questIoN to WhiCh I alLUded, Is this: If these tHings IMplement subuniT Policy, why are tHEy IN TeSTtooLs?
<gAry_poster> anD theY RealLy shOUlD imPLemenT subuNiT PoLIcy for our use.  I'm prettY sUre, thoUgh I'lL want to try and Convine you VERBally wheN you ARe BAck together agaIn to mAke sure I'm rIGht
<benji> Good pOint, moviNg them migHT Be the thiNg tO do; HavE yoU CHeCked to see if thEY'Re usEd ElsewheRe iN testtoOls?
<GarY_poSteR> nO, will look
<Benji> garY_pOsTeR: aLso There'S The point ThAt sOmEonE otheR Than suBunit MighT bE uSIng Them and WE'lL BE yanKiNg Them Out FrOm undEr thEM
<gaRy_posteR> yeah, benjI.  doUBtfuL ImO, But the cOncern is reasoNaBle and propEr.
 * BenJi watcHES his laptOp install 465 updated packageS.
<Gary_posTer> Benji, concUrrentTesTSuIte is tHe oNLy thinG that rEfers To thrEADsafefORwArdInGResult
<garY_POstEr> in tEsTtooLs
<gary_pOster> and probably anYWheRe :-)
<gary_poster> I SusPect THAt ThiS Is WHat
 no concept of whether you  are in atestornot  i n atest , or whether t h at t ag has been reported r ecent ly or n o t<gary _poster >  s o ifyo uuse  t h at  as y our  test r esult
<gar y_p os ter> and the n  y ou wrap it  wi th something  th at *do es * k e ep tr ack  of s tate,s uch as  the aggr eg a ting t h ing
<ga r y _p oste r> then everythin g  s h ould work outfine
< ga r y_ p o ste r>So, if the  l oggin g  test r e su l t int esttools hasno state
<g a ry_ poster >the n  it wo uld b et heclosest ana log<gary_pos ter> a n d our t e st shou ld sho uld  sh ow t h at  t helo g gin g  t est res ult corr ec tl y iscall e d w iththe  pro per a dd tags or re mov e ta g s
< gary_ poste r> * wi th th e subu nit s em antics*
<gary_p oste r> so the  re al  re ma ining questi oninmy mind  is thi s :
< be n j i >gary_poster: so...  t h a tmeans th at wes ho ul d  be able  t o s trip o ut th e st a te ful beha vior i n  T hr eadedFo rw arding <m umb le> Resul t  and  our W orker<mu mble> T estResult anda ll should beh ap p y 
< g ary_ pos ter> benji,  no, beca uset he y a r e res ponsi bl e  f o r maintaining the s ub unit b ehavi or, in the cu rrent setu p .  The onl y pr o bl e m, and the que stion  to whichI  alluded , isthis: if  these th i n gs imple men t s ubu nit p ol icy, why aret h ey i ntesttoo ls? 
<gary_ pos ter > a ndth ey really  shouldim pl em en t s ubuni t  policyfo r o ur  us e.  I ' m pret ty su re,th ou g h I 'll wan t  t o tryan dconv ine  y ou ve rbal l y w hen you  are back  to g ethe rag ain tomake sure I'm  r ight
<benj i>  go od poi n t , moving  them might be the thin g  to do;  ha ve yo u ch ecked tosee  if th ey' r e used  elsew herein  te s t tools ? <g ary _p oster> no, w ill  look 
< benj i> gary _poster: also ther e 'sthe point tha t s omeo n e  o the r  t h ansu b uni t might be usingthem and w e' l lbe yanking the mout fro m under  them <gary_p oster> ye ah, benji . dou b t ful  IMO, butthe conc ern is re a sonab l eand p rop er.
 *  b enj i wat ches h i s l aptop  insta ll  465 u pdate dpackages .
<gary_poster> benji,Concur rentT est Suite isthe onl y thing t hatrefers toThr ead safeF orw a rding Resu l t<ga r y_pos ter> in testto o ls 
<g a r y_ poster> and p r oba bly a nyw h ere :- )
<g ary_poster> I sus p ect that thisis w h a t
 no_concept of_whether you are in_a test_or_not in_a_test, or whether_that tag has_been reported recently or_not
<gary_poster> so if_you_use that as your test result
<gary_poster> and then you wrap it with something that_*does*_keep track_of_state,_such as the aggregating thing
<gary_poster>_then everything should work out_fine
<gary_poster> So,_if the logging test result in testtools has_no_state
<gary_poster> then it_would be the closest analog
<gary_poster> and our test should_should show that the logging test_result correctly is_called_with_the proper add tags_or remove tags
<gary_poster> *with the subunit_semantics*
<gary_poster> so the real remaining question_in my mind is this:
<benji> gary_poster: so..._that means that we should be_able to strip out the_stateful behavior_in ThreadedForwarding<mumble>Result and our Worker<mumble>TestResult_and all should_be happy
<gary_poster>_benji, no, because_they are responsible for maintaining the_subunit behavior, in_the current setup.  The only_problem,_and the question_to_which_I alluded,_is this: if_these_things implement_subunit_policy, why are they in testtools?
<gary_poster>_and_they really should implement subunit policy for_our use.  I'm_pretty_sure, though I'll want_to try and convine you_verbally when you are back together_again to_make sure_I'm right
<benji> good point, moving them might be the thing to_do; have you checked to see_if they're used elsewhere_in testtools?
<gary_poster>_no,_will look
<benji> gary_poster:_also_there's the_point that someone other than subunit might_be using_them and we'll be yanking them_out from under them
<gary_poster>_yeah,_benji.  doubtful IMO, but the_concern is reasonable and proper.
 *_benji watches his laptop install_465_updated_packages.
<gary_poster> benji, ConcurrentTestSuite is the_only thing that refers to ThreadsafeForwardingResult
<gary_poster>_in testtools
<gary_poster> and_probably anywhere :-)
<gary_poster> I suspect that this_is_what