Reconnexion/ng-eventually
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs: deux affirmations que les mesures ont démenties

Browse Source 
La doctrine disait que la suite applicative ne peut pas être mesurée sur une
machine dont le réseau bouge. Elle vient de passer 27/27 quatre fois d'affilée
sous exactement ce bruit. Ce qui tranche n'est donc pas l'état de la machine
mais la FORME de l'échec — un délai nommé sur une opération broker désigne le
transport, une assertion qui rend une valeur inattendue désigne le code — et la
répétition.

Et la feuille sur le règlement de l'identité décrivait encore la session comme
un thunk fourni par l'application. Elle appartient désormais au paquet, dont le
wrapper init() capture l'événement : plus aucune application ne peut la câbler
de travers, ce qui était pourtant la cause exacte de la régression racontée
juste au-dessus.

Dette de doc soldée.
This commit is contained in:
Sylvain Duchesne
2026-08-12 18:32:23 +02:00
parent cc8a95d303
commit dbd99738f0
5 changed files with 8 additions and 34 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
.project/concepts/e2e-harness/caveat_a-dropped-pipe-kills-a-run.md
+5 -3
View File
@@ -16,8 +16,10 @@ Before waits were bounded this was fatal in a specific way: the suite blocked in
## The host can be the cause too
A machine that reconfigures its network — a container in a crash-restart loop cycling its virtual interface, for instance — makes the applicative suite unmeasurable. The browser answers with a network-changed error, broker sockets fail, and every failure looks like a different product bug.
A machine that reconfigures its network — a container in a crash-restart loop cycling its virtual interface, for instance — makes the applicative suite unreliable. The browser answers with a network-changed error, broker sockets fail, and every failure looks like a different product bug.
This has happened here: seven failures out of ten runs, all transport, none product. The check costs seconds — watch for repeated link events, and look for a container restarting.
This has happened here: seven failures out of ten runs in one afternoon, all transport, none product. The check costs seconds — watch for repeated link events, and look for a container restarting.
**The discipline that follows:** a suite that fails for transport reasons has measured nothing. Do not read it as a red baseline, do not chase it as a regression, and do not commit against it. Restore a stable environment first, then measure.
But do not conclude the suite is unmeasurable: under that same churn it also ran green four times in a row. A red run under a moving network proves nothing, and neither does a green one. What decides is the SHAPE of the failure — a named deadline on a browser or broker operation points at the transport, a failed assertion carrying an unexpected value points at the code — and repetition: three consecutive green runs, or a failure that reproduces.
**The discipline that follows:** a suite that fails for transport reasons has measured nothing. Do not read it as a red baseline, do not chase it as a regression, and do not commit against it. Re-run it — and if the environment is known to be moving, say so alongside the result instead of letting a single run stand as the verdict.