Open Stack

Hi

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 13:11 -0800, Shawn Hartsock wrote:
> > Maybe we should have some 60% rule... that is: If you change more than
> > half of a test... you should *probably* rewrite the test in Mock.
>
> A rule needs a reasoning attached to it :)
>
> Why do we want people to use mock?
>
> Is it really for Python3? If so, I assume that means we've ruled out the
> python3 port of mox? (Ok by me, but would be good to hear why) And, if
> that's the case, then we should encourage whoever wants to port mox
> based tests to mock.
>
>
The upstream maintainer is not going to port mox to python3 so we have a
fork of mox called mox3. Ideally, we would drop the usage of mox in favour
of mock so we don't have to carry a forked mox.


> Or maybe it has nothing to do with Python3 at all? Maybe we just like
> mock more? But do we like it enough to have a mixture of mock and mox
> across the codebase?
>
> Mark.
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "John Garbutt" <john at johngarbutt.com>
> > > To: "Mark McLoughlin" <markmc at redhat.com>, "OpenStack Development
> Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> > > <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 9:31:25 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do we have some guidelines for
> mock, stub, mox when writing unit test?
> > >
> > > On 11 November 2013 23:18, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 12:07 +0000, John Garbutt wrote:
> > > >> On 11 November 2013 10:27, Rosa, Andrea (HP Cloud Services)
> > > >> <andrea.rosa at hp.com> wrote:
> > > >> > Hi
> > > >> >
> > > >> >>Generally mock is supposed to be used over mox now for python 3
> support.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > That is my understanding too
> > > >>
> > > >> +1
> > > >>
> > > >> But I don't think we should waste all our time re-writing all our
> mox
> > > >> and stub tests. Lets just leave this to happen organically for now
> as
> > > >> we add and refactor tests. We probably need to take the hit at some
> > > >> point, but that doesn't feel like we should do that right now.
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, I don't follow this stance.
> > > >
> > > > Adding Python3 support is a goal we all share.
> > > >
> > > > If we're saying that the use of mox stands in the way of that goal,
> but
> > > > that we'd really prefer if people didn't work on porting tests from
> mox
> > > > to mock yet ... then are we saying we don't value people working on
> > > > porting to Python3?
> > > >
> > > > And if we plan to use a Python3 compatible version of mox[1], then
> isn't
> > > > the Python3 argument irrelevant and saying "use mock for new tests"
> just
> > > > means we'll end up with a mixture of mox and mock?
> > >
> > > Good point, I forgot about the port of mox to python3.
> > >
> > > I liked the idea of "prefer mock", with a view that at some point in
> > > the future there is only a small amount of mox related code left, that
> > > can easily get moved to mock.
> > >
> > > I guess its a trade off between review capacity, risk of breaking
> > > existing tests, and risk of never reaching that end goal.
> > >
> > > We already have stubs and mox, which do tend to fight each other,
> > > adding a third does seem like a bad plan, unless there is a very good
> > > reason, which I always had in my head as python3 support. Hmm... I do
> > > prefer mock to mox, but not that strongly.
> > >
> > > 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/20131112/a99cb3ec/attachment.html>