Open Stack

 ---- On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 10:48:08 -0500 Martin Kopec <mkopec at redhat.com> wrote ----
 > Hi everyone,
 > I would like to further discuss the topics we covered with the neutron team during 
 > the PTG [1].
 > * adding address_group API capability
 > It's tested by tests in neutron-tempest-plugin. First question is if tests which arenot directly in tempest can be a part of a non-add-on marketing program?It's possible to move them to tempest though, by the time we do so, could they be
 > marked as advisory?
 > 
 > * Shall we include QoS tempest tests since we don't know what share of vendorsenable QoS? Could it be an add-on?These tests are also in neutron-tempest-plugin, I assume we're talking aboutneutron_tempest_plugin.api.test_qos tests.If we want to include these tests, which program should they belong to? Do we wannacreate a new one?

I remember the discussion on the location of tests required by the interop group 2-3 years back (when heat and dns adds-on were added).
We all agreed that having tests in tempest plugins is all fine, they do not need to be in Tempest as such. That is why heat and dns or now manila tests
stays in their respective plugins. 

For neutron also, as there are existing neutron tempest plugin tests we do not need to move them to Tempest and refstack can run it from
neutron-tempest-plugin, if we do move then we might break existing upstream or downstream testing scripts running those existing tests from
the current location.

-gmann

 > [1] https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/neutron-xena-ptg 
 > 
 > Thanks,
 > -- 
 > Martin Kopec
 > Senior Software Quality Engineer
 > Red Hat EMEA
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 >