Hi Raja, point is to avoid any conditional coding to run BVTs. the setup is simple and takes all the tests under "integration/smoke" as is and runs thru nosetests.
As I said before, I do understand where you are coming from. I I’m guessing that by now you also understand my point. As you want to avoid adding a conditional to your setup, I too want to avoid doing the same to the test. My 2cents, "skip" state is the right way to implement for this - most of the test scripts are implemented like this - skip the test if some configuration is missing or not available. However, as a part of the verification process, You will have to look at "pass, skip, failed" test to make sure you are all good with the Tests whether it is BVT or something else. You are absolutely right, skipping tests from within the test is not abnormal, as it happens in some tests already. However, I would argue there if we only stick to the current practices we won’t improve. There are many things being done that can be improved upon, and this seems to me like one of them. Having nothing else to add to this thread I consider my contribution complete. Thanks for you efforts in running much needed tests. Cheers, \ Miguel Ferreira mferre...@schubergphilis.com<mailto:mferre...@schubergphilis.com>
