On 08.03.2013 [11:47:36 -0300], Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 27.02.2013 [22:52:19 -0300], Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: > >> On 02/27/2013 05:54 PM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote: > >> >Great, looks good. > >> > >> Looks good, but the unittests will have to be adapted: > > > > This at least makes things pass, but I think I need to still add some > > tests that actual test that the username being passed in works. I would > > appreciate any help with that. > > I'll take care of that on a followup patch. Now, I've found another problem: > > > + self.parser.add_option('-N', '--username', > > + help='Specify the username to' > > + 'login with', > > + action='store', type='string', > > + dest='username', default=None) > > ^ Here the shorthand -N is used for other action, so there is a > conflict when running the unittests again. I've chosen another > shorthand that doesn't conflict with others (-Q) and fixed the commit > message. > > So, 2 things here: > > 1) Remember to run the entire unittest suite to make sure there are no > side effects to your patches: > > utils/unittest_suite.py --full
Ah sorry, will do that from now on. Are the unittests safe to run in a production instance (guarantee of no data corruption or manipulation?) > 2) In commit messages, excerpts of an email thread are generally not > OK. Here's the commit message I've edited: Yes, I expected you to only use from the commit heading on. I don't tend to use the v1 v. v2 thing, as the e-mail itself tells you that and it's not useful in the commit message (as whatever gets committed is vFinal, and the v1/v2 stuff is more about the iterations via e-mail). Thanks, Nish _______________________________________________ Autotest-kernel mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/autotest-kernel
