Open Stack

On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 03:30:55PM -0500, Douglas Mendiz?bal wrote:

> Hi Asha,
> 
> The blueprint you linked for Tempest is over a year old.  I think it
> pre-dates the Tempest team's decision to stop putting all project
> tests in the same repo.  I believe the spec is obsolete, but someone
> from the Tempest team can correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes, that blueprint was quite old and if you look at the history for it there
was nary a patch submitted against it. So, I guess whoever was planning to do
that work never got around to it. The reason the BP was sitting around for so
long is mostly because I'm terrible at the lp maintenance. I apologize for any
confusion that caused. I took some time this afternoon to go through open
blueprints and specs repo to clean things up. I marked this particular BP as
obsolete now to reflect it's actual state.

You're correct in your assertion that we will be moving to a limited set of
projects for which tests are maintained in the tempest tree. The plan is to have
everything else that wants to use tempest for testing but doesn't fit into that
set of projects leverage tempest-lib and the plugin interface which is currently
in progress. However, until all the pieces are in place, including docs to
explain this all, we're not blocking additions for projects that are currently
in-tree but outside that set. (which does not include barbican because nothing
was ever added)

-Matt Treinish

> 
> The automated tests that validate the API are the Functional Tests I
> linked in my earlier email.
> 
> - - Douglas Mendiz?bal
> 
> On 7/1/15 3:22 PM, Asha Seshagiri wrote:
> > Hi Douglas ,
> > 
> > Are there any Automated Test cases created for validating the
> > Barbican APIs.
> > 
> > Thanks and Regards, Asha Seshagiri
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Asha Seshagiri
> > <asha.seshagiri at gmail.com <mailto:asha.seshagiri at gmail.com>>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks Douglas for your response and appreciate for pointing me to 
> > the right link
> > 
> > I was talking about the tempest tests to validate the Barbican
> > APIs Please find the spec[1] and blue print link [2] for the same
> > .
> > 
> > [1]http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/qa-specs/specs/barbican-api-te
> sts.html
> >
> > 
> [2]https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/add-basic-tests-for-ba
> rbican
> > 
> > Are above specs and blueprint have become void for Barbican? Now I
> > could use the  link sent by you for validating the APIs
> > 
> > Thanks and Regards, Asha Seshagiri
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Douglas Mendiz?bal 
> > <douglas.mendizabal at rackspace.com 
> > <mailto:douglas.mendizabal at rackspace.com>> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Asha,
> > 
> > I'm not sure what you mean by "tempest tests."  If you're looking
> > for Functional Tests for Barbican, then you can find them in the 
> > functionaltests directory [1] inside the Barbican repo.
> > 
> > We have no intentions of adding Barbican specific tests to the 
> > Tempest repo.  It's my understanding that Tempest is moving away
> > from one monolithic repository into a modular approach using
> > tempest-lib.
> > 
> > - Douglas Mendiz?bal
> > 
> > [1] 
> > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/barbican/tree/functionaltest
> >
> > 
> s
> > 
> > 
> > On 7/1/15 2:12 PM, Asha Seshagiri wrote:
> >> Hi All ,
> > 
> >> Has anyone done the Tempest tests for Barbican API Any help
> >> would be highly appreciated.
> > 
> >> -- /Thanks and Regards,/ /Asha Seshagiri/
> > 
> > 
> > -- /Thanks and Regards,/ /Asha Seshagiri/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150702/4938953f/attachment.pgp>