Skip to content
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

Feature request: Generic summarizing #19

Open
K1D77A opened this issue Jun 19, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Feature request: Generic summarizing #19

K1D77A opened this issue Jun 19, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@K1D77A
Copy link

K1D77A commented Jun 19, 2023

This is a shot in the dark but would a maintainer be willing to change summarize to be generic? Right now all output is text but certain CI systems like gitlab support xml output to report unit tests. If the summarizing system was generic it would be possible to 'bolt-in' new means of creating summaries, like :text or :html or :xml, these could be defined as independent systems and only the required loaded.

Thanks.

@bobbysmith007
Copy link
Member

bobbysmith007 commented Jun 20, 2023

I am not opposed to any change that helps these projects be used. That said I haven't worked in lisp in a number of years at this point, so any change I made would probably need to be made with the help of a user who is using it, so we can verify that everything still functions.

I think we were outputting both TAP and plain text. I would assume that xml or html could be generated, then returned as a string which wouldn't require changing any types.

@bobbysmith007
Copy link
Member

If you take a look at https://github.com/AccelerationNet/lisp-unit2/blob/master/test-anything-protocol.lisp that should give you an outline of how to produce the outputs you want when running your tests. Basically create a context around handling the test results, and then write them out in whatever format you need. Since I have not been using it and don't know the specific xml flavor needed to interact with whatever system you are using, I am not sure it makes sense for me to write this code. I am happy to review and merge any PRs that come my way

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants