Michael, Tim, Nice to see you, guys, agreed. But what should I do now? Dive into trove-integration? I guess there will be no use of mocked tests, coz I haven't actually written a single line of server side code. All the fun is in guest agent.
Thanks >> For the api stuff, sure thats fine. i just think the overall coverage of > the review will be quite low if we are only testing the API via fake code. > > We're in agreement here, I think. I will say though that if the people > working on Mongo want to test it early, and go beyond simply using the > client to manually confirm stuff, it should be possible to run the existing > tests by building a different image and running a subset, such as > "--group=dbaas.guest.shutdown". IIRC those tests don't do much other than > make an instance, see it turn to ACTIVE, and delete it. It would be a > worthwhile spot test to see if it adheres to the bare-minimum Trove API. > > ________________________________________ > From: Michael Basnight [mbasni...@gmail.com <javascript:;>] > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 12:19 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Trove] Testing of new service types support > > On Oct 21, 2013, at 10:02 AM, Tim Simpson wrote: > > > Can't we say that about nearly any feature though? In theory we could > put a hold on any tests for feature work saying it > > will need to be redone when Tempest integrated is finished. > > > > Keep in mind what I'm suggesting here is a fairly trivial change to get > some validation via the existing fake mode / integration tests at a fairly > small cost. > > Of course we can do the old tests. And for this it might be the best > thing. The problem i see is that we cant do real integration tests w/o this > work, and i dont want to integrate a bunch of different service_types w/o > tests that actually spin them up and run the guest, which is where 80% of > the "new" code lives for a new service_type. Otherwise we are running > fake-guest stuff that is not a good representation. > > For the api stuff, sure thats fine. i just think the overall coverage of > the review will be quite low if we are only testing the API via fake code. > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org <javascript:;> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- Best regards, Illia Khudoshyn, Software Engineer, Mirantis, Inc. 38, Lenina ave. Kharkov, Ukraine www.mirantis.com <http://www.mirantis.ru/> www.mirantis.ru Skype: gluke_work ikhudos...@mirantis.com
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
