> > > > > The double entry principle has saved my teams countless hours and > problems. It is one factor in a series of principles related to > Continuous Delivery that make complex systems easier to develop and > maintain for years, by ever changing teams of people. I would be > conservative in saying that well factored testing cuts the total cost > of ownership in half, rather than doubling it. >
My suggestion is that the right things,not the wrong things, be tested. Test functionality, not implementation. > > We clearly disagree on this point. Version control was the least of > our worries, and we had it in many places before the notion of > "infrastructure as code" ever came along. And certainly before Chef, > Puppet or Ansible entered the picture. (As an example: People have > done amazing things with version controlled Make for decades.) > This is a logical fallacy to suggest I was suggesting version control is more important than validation. > > I strongly believe that we have gained much by applying the notion > that configuring infrastructure is something that can be compiled > once, tested throughout and run repeatably in many places, with a > single button click/command. > No one was suggesting not to test things. In fact, I've advocated for solid integration tests many times, including assertation that a system works before putting it back into a load balanced pool, etc. As well as stage environments. What I'm suggesting is that using serverspec to assert that /etc/motd has the right permissions when it's also specified in your ansible playbook is a waste of time. Focus on real tests that add value. > > Ansible has done great things for the ops world. Ansible has been very > well received by even the stodgiest of old school sys admins. But, I > sincerely hope that Ansible's message does not become one that undoes > the notions of testability, formality, and communication required to > build complex systems, repeatably, reliably, consistently, > maintainably, and easily that have been introduced in the last decade. > This part of the message is pretty content free and seems to having lack what was written above, and we have *never* said that. I'm just recoiling against a lot of people who don't understand testing, and say that "if testing is good, more testing is better", and they spend time testing the wrong things, like the permission of every file on the filesystem. Most of the serverspec content I've seen is an absolute waste of time, and the need for it came out of tools that did not fail fast, had unpredictable ordering, and other things, which are much strongly less of an issue in Ansible. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ansible Project" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ansible-project/CA%2BnsWgywZn76edMQ%2BUOTLbAbpUAL13VBtcdEnKPMuwgbMSRfWg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
