Open Stack

Hi Sean,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Dague [mailto:sean at dague.net]
> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 10:22 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft
> 
> As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team is looking
> pretty positive at no longer branching Tempest. The QA Spec draft for this is
> here - http://docs-draft.openstack.org/77/86577/2/check/gate-qa-specs-
> docs/3f84796/doc/build/html/specs/branchless-tempest.html
> and hopefully address a lot of the questions we've seen so far.
> 
> Additional comments are welcome on the review -
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/86577/
> or as responses on this ML thread.
> 
> 	-Sean
> 
> --
> Sean Dague
> Samsung Research America
> sean at dague.net / sean.dague at samsung.com
> http://dague.net

There is one more scenario where interface of the existing APIs gets changed
may be only for experimental APIs (Nova V3 APIs). I have following question
regarding those.
	1. How we are going to tag those in Branchless Tempest? Should we keep two versions of tests for old and new API interface.
	2. Till Branchless Tempest is not Implemented, tempest test
                     has to be skipped for those as they get failed on Ice-House gate tests.
                    So for tempest part of those changes should we wait for implementation of      
                    Branchless tempest to complete?

For example,
 'os-instance_actions' v3 API changed to 'os-server-actions' (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/57614/)
 after Ice-house release and its respective tests are skipped in tempest.
Now https://review.openstack.org/#/c/85666/  adds the response validation for this API in tempest.
As API tempest tests are skipped (cannot unskip as ice-house gate test fails), response validation code
will be untested on gate. 
My question is how I should go on these-
1. Should I wait for implementation of Branchless tempest to complete?
2. OK to merge even this is going to be untested on gate.


Thanks
Ghanshyam Mann



DISCLAIMER:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and
intended
for the named recipient(s) only. 
It shall not attach any liability on the originator or NEC or its
affiliates. Any views or opinions presented in 
this email are solely those of the author and may not necessarily reflect the
opinions of NEC or its affiliates. 
Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification,
distribution and / or publication of 
this message without the prior written consent of the author of this e-mail is
strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender
immediately. .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------