Ok, makes sense, but that sounds like even more work :) Can you share the plan on how will this work?
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Darren Shepherd < darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it can't be at a component level because components are too large. > It needs to be at a feature for implementation level. For example, live > storage migration for xen and live storage migration for kvm (don't know if > that's a real thing) would be two separate items. > > Darren > > > On Oct 27, 2013, at 10:57 AM, Laszlo Hornyak <laszlo.horn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I believe this will be very useful for users. > > As far as I understand someone will have to qualify components. What will > > be the method for qualification? I do not think simply the test coverage > > would be right. But then if you want to go deeper, then you need a bigger > > effort testing the components. > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Darren Shepherd < > > darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I don't know if a similar thing has been talked about before but I > >> thought I'd just throws this out there. The ultimate way to ensure > >> quality is that we have unit test and integration test coverage on all > >> functionality. That way somebody authors some code, commits to, for > >> example, 4.2, but then when we release 4.3, 4.4, etc they aren't on > >> the hook to manually tests the functionality with each release. The > >> obvious nature of a community project is that people come and go. If > >> a contributor wants to ensure the long term viability of the > >> component, they should ensure that there are unit+integration tests. > >> > >> Now, for whatever reason whether good or bad, it's not always possible > >> to have full integration tests. I don't want to throw down the gamut > >> and say everything must have coverage because that will mean some > >> useful code/feature will not get in because of some coverage wasn't > >> possible at the time. > >> > >> What I propose is that for every feature or function we put it in a > >> tier of what is the quality of it (very similar to how OpenStack > >> qualifies their hypervisor integration). Tier A means unit test and > >> integration test coverage gates the release. Tier B means unit test > >> coverage gates the release. Tier C mean who knows, it compiled. We > >> can go through and classify the components and then as a community we > >> can try to get as much into Tier A as possible. > >> > >> Darren > > > > > > > > -- > > > > EOF > -- EOF
