Open Stack

Thanks everyone for feedback. Will follow the standard approach with HTTP
requests in tempest tests.

Thanks
Georgy


On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:

> Pretty much 100% agree with Russell and Ryan.
>
> Webtest is interesting for in tree testing with Solum, because it's
> specifically *not* bringing up the full stack.
>
> When it comes to Tempest, you are hitting a live OpenStack cloud, most
> likely not on the same machine as Tempest is on (not true in the gate
> today... but we try to act like it is). So you must hit HTTP.
>
>         -Sean
>
> On 12/10/2013 04:24 PM, Ryan Petrello wrote:
> > My opinion is that there’s value in both.  Writing functional tests for
> Solum’s test suite using WebTest can be pretty useful for testing the API’s
> logic without having to involve HTTP (to e.g., call API endpoints with
> certain POST arguments and assert that certain mocked functions end up
> being called down the line).
> >
> > When you involve Tempest, though, you’re generally pointing at a real
> HTTP server and testing for correctness, so using HTTP here makes sense
> (imo).
> >
> > ---
> > Ryan Petrello
> > Senior Developer, DreamHost
> > ryan.petrello at dreamhost.com
> >
> > On Dec 10, 2013, at 4:12 PM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/10/2013 04:10 PM, Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> In Solum project we are currently creating tests environments for
> future
> >>> test. We split unit tests and functional tests in order to use tempest
> >>> framework from the beginning.
> >>>
> >>> Tempest framework assumes that you run your service and test APi
> >>> endpoints by sending HTTP requests. Solum uses Pecan WSGI framework
> >>> which has its own test framework based on WebTest. This framework
> allows
> >>> to test application without sending actual HTTP traffic. It mocks low
> >>> level stuff related to transport but keeps all high level WSGI part as
> >>> it is a real life application\service.
> >>>
> >>> There is a question to QA\Tempest teams, what do you think about using
> >>> pecan test framework in tempest for Pecan based applications?
> >>
> >> I don't think that makes sense.  Then we're not using the code like it
> >> would be used normally (via HTTP).
> >>
> >> --
> >> Russell Bryant
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
>
>
> --
> Sean Dague
> http://dague.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
Georgy Okrokvertskhov
Technical Program Manager,
Cloud and Infrastructure Services,
Mirantis
http://www.mirantis.com
Tel. +1 650 963 9828
Mob. +1 650 996 3284
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131210/b3075c69/attachment.html>