Open Stack

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:37 PM, yang, xing <xing.yang at emc.com> wrote:

> +1.  I like this idea.  With this qualification test, is each driver still
> required to have its own unit test?
>

Keep in mind this is just a proposal that I wanted to get feed-back on,
I'll likely submit something more concrete shortly.  That being said, no
this would NOT eliminate or preclude any current process or requirements.
 The idea here is to augment the existing process and provide some method
of visible functional testing compliance.

>
> Thanks,
> Xing
>
>
> On Jul 25, 2013, at 8:46 PM, "John Griffith" <john.griffith at solidfire.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey Everyone,
>
> Something I've been kicking around for quite a while now but never really
> been able to get around to is the idea of requiring that drivers in Cinder
> run a qualification test and submit results prior to introduction in to
> Cinder.
>
> To elaborate a bit, the idea could start as something really simple like
> the following:
> 1. We'd add a functional_qual option/script to devstack
>
> 2. Driver maintainer runs this script to setup devstack and configure it
> to use their backend device on their own system.
>
> 3. Script does the usual devstack install/configure and runs the volume
> pieces of the Tempest gate tests.
>
> 4. Grabs output and checksums of the directories in the devstack and
> /opt/stack directories, bundles up the results for submission
>
> 5. Maintainer submits results
>
> So why would we do this you ask?  Cinder is pretty heavy on the third
> party driver plugin model which is fantastic.  On the other hand while
> there are a lot of folks who do great reviews that catch things like syntax
> or logic errors in the code, and unit tests do a reasonable job of
> exercising the code it's difficult for folks to truly verify these devices
> all work.
>
> I think it would be a very useful tool for initial introduction of a new
> driver and even perhaps some sort of check that's run and submitted again
> prior to milestone releases.
>
> This would also drive some more activity and contribution in to Tempest
> with respect to getting folks like myself motivated to contribute more
> tests (particularly in terms of new functionality) in to Tempest.
>
> I'd be interested to hear if folks have any interest or strong opinions on
> this (positive or otherwise).  I know that some vendors like RedHat have
> this sort of thing in place for certifications, and to be honest that
> observation is something that caused me to start thinking about this again.
>
> There are a lot of gaps here regarding how the submission process would
> look, but we could start relatively simple and grow from there if it's
> valuable or just abandon the idea if it proves to be unpopular and a waste
> of time.
>
> Anyway, I'd love to get feed-back from folks and see what they think.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130725/8ed6ca06/attachment.html>