-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.8k
Hide xfail/xleak test summary #17109
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
We don't show succeeding tests in the summary, and for all intents and purposes, these tests have succeeded, in that they behave as expected. I've seen the output confuse people on multiple occasions, for example phpGH-17105.
I think we still want a flag to be able to display them in CI/local dev? |
@Girgias You can pretty much already achieve that with |
Forgot about |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure if it is a good idea to brush that under the carpet. The whole point of XFAIL is that we want to see whether the issue is fixed at some point in time, and until it is not, to be reminded of and have documentation about limitations. Similar as we don't auto-close (very) old bug reports.
Precisely. Once they do, they will show up as warnings. But as long as they still fail, they just add noise.
Ok, but that can also be achieved by searching for |
Well, in a perfect world we wouldn't have this discussion, but instead fix the XFAIL reasons. However, this is not a perfect world, so it's okay for me to remove the expected fail summary. |
I'm somewhat skeptical whether PHP would exist in a perfect world 😄 |
We don't show succeeding tests in the summary, and for all intents and purposes, these tests have succeeded, in that they behave as expected. I've seen the output confuse people on multiple occasions, for example phpGH-17105. Closes phpGH-17109
We don't show succeeding tests in the summary, and for all intents and purposes, these tests have succeeded, in that they behave as expected. I've seen the output confuse people on multiple occasions, for example GH-17105.