Open Stack

On Wed 18 Sep 2013 12:34:46 PM CEST, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
> On 09/18/2013 03:37 PM, Martina Kollarova wrote:
>> There is a lack of design documentation and specification in the blueprints, creating test
>> plans is problematic and requires a lot of communication with the developers. I was
>> wondering whether we could partially remedy this by creating a place where we could share
>> test plans - a place to add comments, point out problems and figure out the weak points of
>> the features.
>>
>> These test plans wouldn't be meant for documenting the
>> existing tests (documenting 800+ test cases would be impossible
>> anyway), just as a means of communication.
>>
>> My current solution is github + text files[1]. I chose using github because it's more
>> likely to be actually used by developers. Another alternative would be the wiki, but I
>> think the code-like nature of test plans would profit from using the same tools as for
>> code. Putting them right into the blueprints would be problematic, as it doesn't support
>> formatting, but we can link them there.
>
> +1
>
> FWIW, I always prefer text files + git based approach. See more below.
>
>>
>> Are there perhaps some better solutions for this? Would it be worth our time to try this?
>
> I think, yes.
>
> There was a prior discussion[*] on this topic a couple of months ago -- read complete
> thread, if you have patience.
>
> I noted my 02 cents on why plain text (obvious, but just spelled out), reposting here:
>
>
>    (1) Text file are fast, easy to manage. I bet, they'll still be here 50 years
>        later! Bulky "management systems" - I doubt that.
>
>    (2) Works well over bad internet connections/remotely (I often work w/ a 2GB
>        usb internet card). We can use tmux/screen session on a remote machine & work
>        peacefully.
>
>    (3) You can send patches, and apply them via the venerable git (and do all
>        other magic).
>
>    (4) Most (linux) developers are averse to clicky things. I've never seen
>        really happy developers reviewing tests from a heavy clickety management system.
>        However, they're (some) happy to contribute tests if it's based on
>        text files using git.

Exactly my reasoning. I think most of developers are even averse to 
editing wiki pages.

>
>    (5) OpenStack uses rST (for all its README & docs & everywhere else).
>        But, I'm aware, it's not the same as tests.

I'm actually using rST formatting in them.

>
>    (6) Add your own...
>
>
> [*] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-qa/2013-May/000356.html
>

--
irc: mkollaro