Open Stack

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi <ken1ohmichi at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> 2014-05-01 5:44 GMT+09:00 David Kranz <dkranz at redhat.com>:
> > There have been a lot of patches that add the validation of response
> dicts.
> > We need a policy on whether this is required or not. For example, this
> patch
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/87438/5
> >
> > is for the equivalent of 'cinder service-list' and is a basically a copy
> of
> > the nova test which now does the validation. So two questions:
> >
> > Is cinder going to do this kind of checking?
> > If so, should new tests be required to do it on submission?
>
> I'm not sure someone will add the similar validation, which we are adding
> to
> Nova API tests, to Cinder API tests also. but it would be nice for Cinder
> and
> Tempest. The validation can be applied to the other projects(Cinder, etc)
> easily because the base framework is implemented in common rest client
> of Tempest.
>
> When adding new tests like https://review.openstack.org/#/c/87438 , I
> don't
> have strong opinion for including the validation also. These schemas will
> be
> large sometimes and the combination in the same patch would make reviews
> difficult. In current Nova API test implementations, we are separating them
> into different patches.
>
>
Separating the schema part into a separate dependent patch probably makes
sense when they large but I would like to see us ratchet the requirement to
have schema validation for the cinder api as well too.

Chris




>
> Thanks
> Ken'ichi Ohmichi
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140505/6036089c/attachment.html>