On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 01:45:55AM +0000, Kenichi Oomichi wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Matthew Treinish [mailto:mtrein...@kortar.org] > > Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 11:58 PM > > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] Clarification of policy for qa-specs > > around adding new tests > > > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:46:51AM -0400, David Kranz wrote: > > > I have been reviewing some of these specs and sense a lack of clarity > > > around > > > what is expected. In the pre-qa-specs world we did not want tempest > > > blueprints to be used by projects to track their tempest test submissions > > > because the core review team did not want to have to spend a lot of time > > > dealing with that. We said that each project could have one tempest > > > blueprint that would point to some other place (project blueprints, > > > spreadsheet, etherpad, etc.) that would track specific tests to be added. > > > I'm not sure what aspect of the new qa-spec process would make us feel > > > differently about this. Has this policy changed? We should spell out the > > > expectation in any event. I will update the README when we have a > > > conclusion. > > > > > > > The policy has not changed. There should be 1 BP (or maybe 2 or 3 if they > > want > > to split the effort a bit more granularly for tracking different classes of > > tests, but still 1 BP series) for improving project tests. For individual > > tests > > part of a bigger effort should be tracked outside of the Tempest LP. IMO > > after > > it's approved the spec/BP for tracking test additions is only really useful > > to > > have a unified topic to use for review classification. > > +1 to use a single blueprint for adding new tests of each project. > The unified topic of each project would be useful to get each project > reviewers' effort on the Tempest tests reviews. > To add new tests, do we need to have qa-specs, or is it OK to have > blueprints only? >
So I've been asking all the new BPs for project testing being opened this cycle to have a spec too. My feeling is that we should only have one process for doing BPs/specs that way we get all the artifacts in the same place. It should also hopefully get everyone more involved with the qa-specs workflow. The specs for adding project test should be pretty simple, they just basically need to outline what project is going to be tested, what types of tests are going to be worked on, (API, CLI, etc..) and how the test development is going to be tracked. (etherpad, google doc, etc.) -Matt Treinish
pgpve1uKjCslX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
