adt-run, when used on the touch image, handles unlocking the device for you. We will make sure the device is provisioned in advance.
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Chris Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the clarification Paul. > > A follow on discussion about Utah and its replacement, can we confirm the > environment for the dep8 tests that will be run? > Namely we are interested in wherever the device will be provisioned and > the screen unlocked so that any tests can run unhindered. > > QA team, am I missing anything else that we need to confirm? > > > Chris > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Paul Larson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Chris Lee <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I'm working on the memevent tests that can be found in >>> lp:ubuntu-test-cases/touch[1]. >>> One of the tasks is to make it dep8 compliant and I have a couple of >>> questions regarding the best way forward. >>> >>> 1. Would you prefer if I move the memevent tests out into it's own >>> branch to make the dep8 stuff easier to handle? Or do you prefer keeping it >>> under the ubuntu-test-cases/touch branch? >>> >> We don't have an existing precedent for this, but here are my thoughts. >> I like the idea of having tests that other teams maintain in a separate >> branch, because it gives you full control over what goes into it. BUT, we >> also don't want to have changes creeping into the CI runs without any idea >> where they came from. So what I would propose, is that for now you develop >> in a separate branch, and we pull the contents of that branch into >> ubuntu-test-cases when we're ready to run the adt version. When you have an >> update, you tell us to pull and we do a quick test to make sure it still >> behaves and doesn't exhibit some strange new behavior, and then pull it >> in. Otherwise, if you want to keep everything against our trunk, MPs >> against that are fine as well. >> >> >>> 2. Are the Utah setup files still needed or, due to it being dep8, is >>> this no longer needed and the provisioning sorted out elsewhere? >>> >> No, assume utah will no longer be used at all. The one piece that may >> linger for a short while is the yaml results format since the dashboard >> consumes that. We already have a script that can take the junitxml that we >> convert from subunit, and convert that to yaml though, so there's nothing >> you need to do there. Once the dashboard speaks subunit, there won't even >> be a need for that. >> >> Thanks for working on this! >> - Paul Larson >> > >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~canonical-ci-engineering Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~canonical-ci-engineering More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
