go.tools/dashboard/builder: always build all packages i...

go.tools/dashboard/builder: always build all packages in a subrepo

Fixes issue 7372.

Because of the use of go get -d and hg update to fetch the right revision of the subrepo a situation can arise where a package can fail to compile but this goes undetected if the package has no tests.

This change does a go build $REPO/... before go test $REPO/... to try to detect this situation.

Currently there are two breakages in to go.tools subrepo which will fire if this change is committed.

[brainman, 2014-02-21 06:07:39]

LGTM

as a stop gap, but I would rather see it resolved as part of issue 7108. Perhaps
add a TODO: to remove new code once/if issue 7108 is resolved.

Alex

[dave_cheney.net, 2014-02-21 06:08:56]

Thanks for the review. I agree this is a bit of a kludge. I'd like to see a
comment from adg or rsc as they own the go tool


On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:07 PM, <alex.brainman@gmail.com> wrote:

> LGTM
>
> as a stop gap, but I would rather see it resolved as part of issue 7108.
> Perhaps add a TODO: to remove new code once/if issue 7108 is resolved.
>
> Alex
>
> https://codereview.appspot.com/66800043/
>

[adg, 2014-02-23 22:25:50]

LGTM

This will break the go-tour repo, at least. And possibly go.talks. That's not a
blocker, just something we'll need to fix.

[dave_cheney.net, 2014-02-23 22:31:23]

Hmm, well I don't want to introduce more breakage. 

A while back mr brainman raised the issue of how to deal with packages that have
no _test.go files. As an alternative to blindly compiling anything with a .go
extension, and then having to apply a tonne of dull // +build ignore
boilerplate, I would be happy with a policy of 'if you want it tested, just add
a test'. 

Thoughts? Possibly on the original issue. 

> On 24 Feb 2014, at 9:25, adg@golang.org wrote:
> 
> LGTM
> 
> This will break the go-tour repo, at least. And possibly go.talks.
> That's not a blocker, just something we'll need to fix.
> 
> 
> https://codereview.appspot.com/66800043/

[adg, 2014-02-23 22:36:09]

Nah, I think we should fix "go get code.google.com/p/go-tour/..." with
+build tags. For the tour, blog, and talks code snippets, we can use "//
+build OMIT" to avoid building and avoid the build tag appearing in the
presentation.

Andrew


On 24 February 2014 09:31, Dave Cheney <dave@cheney.net> wrote:

> Hmm, well I don't want to introduce more breakage.
>
> A while back mr brainman raised the issue of how to deal with packages
> that have no _test.go files. As an alternative to blindly compiling
> anything with a .go extension, and then having to apply a tonne of dull //
> +build ignore boilerplate, I would be happy with a policy of 'if you want
> it tested, just add a test'.
>
> Thoughts? Possibly on the original issue.
>
> > On 24 Feb 2014, at 9:25, adg@golang.org wrote:
> >
> > LGTM
> >
> > This will break the go-tour repo, at least. And possibly go.talks.
> > That's not a blocker, just something we'll need to fix.
> >
> >
> > https://codereview.appspot.com/66800043/
>

[rsc, 2014-02-24 16:10:08]

LGTM

this is a good idea, thanks.