On 09.12.2015 12:40, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 12/09/2015 11:29 AM, Lenka Doudova wrote:
On 12/09/2015 10:13 AM, Martin Basti wrote:
On 09.12.2015 09:41, Lenka Doudova wrote:
attaching fixed patches for master and ipa-4-2 branch.
Also fixes test accordingly to
On 11/20/2015 12:13 PM, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 11/19/2015 10:34 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 11/19/2015 09:30 AM, Lenka Doudova wrote:
On 11/18/2015 04:51 PM, Martin Babinsky wrote:
On 11/18/2015 02:16 PM, Lenka Doudova wrote:
here's a patch that adds a few comments to stageuser tests in
allow easier determining of a problem when tests fail.
Firstly a technical detail: Python indexes lists from 0, so the
comments in 'options_ok' do not correctly map to the test names
I am also not sure if this patch is worth reviewing and pushing
IMHO doesn't help in the identification of failed tests at all.
This should be solved at more fundamental level.
Ouch, good point, I didn't realize. Sorry.
Anyway, the issue is that even if tests are run in verbose mode,
output like this:
If some test fails, you can't really tell which command was the one
responsible for the fail. This should be solved by
https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5449. Until that's done,
the only way to find out which command failed is looking at the
finding which parameters were put into the command, which was not
possible without better commenting the test case (as I realized
week when David Kupka asked me to help him find the reason for
Obviously I can rewrite the tests so there's 27 separate test
for each parameter, instead of one method that 'unwraps' into 27
cases, which would entirely eliminate the confusion. So far I
of a way to put 27 similar test cases in one method which would
easy recognition of the test cases.
I'll wait with fixing the patch until further discussion.
Pytest wants you to be a bit more explicit about how to name the
parameters. (It "hides" dicts by default, because large dicts would
the output even more confusing than the numbers.)
Please try the attached patch.
Docs are at
This looks like a better approach IMHO, you can then see which
attribute/value was being checked.
I would very much favor more descriptive test/fixture names in the
we use usually bottom posting on freeipa-devel please try to keep
reply in this way.
I do not like the idea of separated lists, IMO it is hard to manage
and is easy to create mistakes.
How about this (untested, just from top of my head):
Great idea, thanks. Fixed patches attached.
Tests pass and code looks good, ACK.
Pushed to master: a66a2c5160dbc23cdeec55d17422812028939e16
Pushed to ipa-4-2: 75675fc71a148dcc17b025a80123aa01644f5297
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code