Open Stack

+1. Especially if you don't use "fake" mode of Nailgun, I don't know why
would you even be copying legacy code to the new repo..

Thanks!

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:25 AM Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 08/17/2015 08:50 AM, Roman Prykhodchenko wrote:
> > Hi Fuelers!
> >
> > I was working on enabling Python tests in Fuel Client to run on
> > OpenStack CI and I figured out that we actually have a piece of
> > legacy code which can be removed now. That piece is run_tests.sh
> > file. For those who’s not aware, that script allows to run different
> > tests under different environments. I don’t know how it was a
> > thousand years ago when I was not involved to Fuel project, but the
> > situation at this particular moment looks like that:
> >
> > - Tests are actually orchestrated by tox - The biggest job of
> > run_tests.sh is to translate its options to tox’es options - The only
> > useful job of run_tests.sh is to start Nailgun correctly for
> > functional tests
> >
> > As you can see the profit of that script is tiny. However, the
> > problems it brings are pretty much big and looks as follows:
> >
> > - It is unstable — tiniest changes to tests require big changes to
> > the script - The CLI it provides is confusing - Working on that file
> > looks like doing the same job that is already done in tox - Among the
> > active Fuel Client’s community there are only a few guys who are
> > proficient in bash enough, to support that script effectively
> >
> >
> > My proposal is to extract the code responsible for starting Nailgun
> > into to a small utility script and let tox do the rest by removing
> > run_test.sh completely. That will bring us the following advantages:
> >
> > - No need to support a complex bash script. - Closer to being able to
> > run functional tests on DSVM gates. - Test CLI will be more
> > compatible with other OpenStack projects.
> >
> > I foresee a few questions and the answers for them follow:
> >
> > Q: How is verify-job from FuelCI going to run tests without that
> > file? A: Fuel Client has its own job on FuelCI, so it will be just
> > necessary to change the invocation there.
> >
> > Q: But run_test.sh is in all Fuel projects, shouldn’t we keep them
> > all similar. A: Why does it have to be similar? This kind of
> > difference is minor and it brings more advantages, than just having
> > the same file. In fact the set of options in run_tests.sh is already
> > different from run_tests.sh in fuel-web.
> >
> > Q: Why should we look ad other OpenStack projects? A: Fuel is living
> > in the OpenStack ecosystem so being compatible with it is a big
> > advantage. It’s also a must for going big tent.
>
> +1.
>
> Just make sure any documentation that might refer to run_tests.sh is
> updated accordingly :)
>
> Best,
> -jay
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-- 
Mike Scherbakov
#mihgen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150817/140bb974/attachment.html>