[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1865?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13723680#comment-13723680
]
Alexander Shorin commented on COUCHDB-1865:
-------------------------------------------
[~kimstebel]
> how would you do this part if you only have to documentation examples as
> input?
That's why I like katt's approach to have documentation as tests: all required
environment could be set with common test routines while only specific cases
will be backported as articles and sections Sphinx docs.
However, the key idea of this issue is to reduce amount of work to keep docs
examples valid. Will they be as part of some tests or will be generated by
tests is an implementation details.
> Use HTTP API examples as tests...
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-1865
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1865
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Documentation, Test Suite
> Reporter: Alexander Shorin
>
> ...or use tests as HTTP API examples.
> First way is completely based on Sphinx ReST format: there is need to parse
> rst files, extract required directives and convert them to test cases. That's
> a Python way to go since it already contains package for parsing and
> operating with all required content.
> The second way it about using project like
> [katt|https://github.com/klarna/katt] which tests HTTP API by using
> human-readable files for test cases. Currently, their format is similar to
> Markdown, but I think it would be a problem to upgrade it to ReST, right?
> This way is completely Erlang`ish.
> First way is fast and cheap, but strict to sphinx docs content. Second is a
> bit longer, but doesn't binds to docs since only part of his tests will be
> used as base for docs.
> Which road better to go?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
