Open Stack

On Fri, 2013-01-04 at 11:12 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >> To fix the stable/folsom issues, how about we say that the stable/folsom
> >> tests only need to test the 0.2.0 version of keystoneclient, not master?
> >>
> >> That's as simple as this change:
> >>
> >>   @@ -789,7 +789,7 @@ class KeystoneClientTests(object):
> >>  
> >>    class KcMasterTestCase(CompatTestCase, KeystoneClientTests):
> >>        def get_checkout(self):
> >>   -        return KEYSTONECLIENT_REPO, 'master'
> >>   +        return KEYSTONECLIENT_REPO, '0.2.0'
> >>  
> >>        def test_tenant_add_and_remove_user(self):
> >>            client = self.get_client(admin=True)
> > 
> > Proposed here: https://review.openstack.org/18898
> 
> Mixed feelings: we are supposed to always use the latest client --
> that's why there is no stable/folsom branch of the client.

Right, but there's something very wrong with using keystone
stable/folsom unit tests to catch regressions in keystoneclient master.

Testing keystone stable/folsom with keystoneclient 0.2.0 is fine because
it will catch regressions in keystone itself.

For catching regressions in keystoneclient master, the keystoneclient
testing which happens on keystone master is sufficient.

> The real issue here is the test itself. I'm fine with this as a
> temporary workaround to unblock keystone stable/folsom, as long as it's
> clear that this test needs to be rewritten (or moved to tempest).

Yes, it's a stopgap measure.

Cheers,
Mark.