On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Greg Von Kuster <g...@bx.psu.edu> wrote:
>>> I don't agree with this - the sample files should be used as guidance for
>>> the admin to create functionally correct .loc files.  This is the same
>>> aopproach used for all Galaxy .sample files ( e.g., universe_wsgi.ini.sample
>>> <-> universe_wsgi.ini, etc )
>> Why then does the tool_conf.xml.sample file get used by the
>> test framework then? This is a clear example of *.xml.sample
>> being used in the test framework over the 'real' file *.xml.
>> I really don't understand this design choice - I would use
>> tool_conf.xml (it lists the tools actually installed on our Galaxy,
>> and therefore the things worth testing) while by default
>> tool_conf.xml.sample includes a whole load of things where
>> the binaries etc are missing and so the tests will fail (hiding
>> potential real failures in the noise).
> I'm not quite sure of the reason for htis as I didn't make this
> design choice - I'm sure "ancient Galaxy history" plays a role
> in this decision.

Probably ;)

>> Perhaps rather than overloading *.loc.sample with two roles
>> (sample configuration/documentation and unit tests), we
>> need to introduce *.loc.test for functional testing purposes?
> I'm hoping we don''t have to go this route as we have so many
> priorities.  If you would like this implemented though, please
> add a new Trello card and we'll consider it.


>> That still leaves open the question of how best to install
>> the test databases or files that the *.loc.test file would
>> point at for running functional tests.
> Yes!

I look forward to some more details from Dan on *.loc
file setup.

Thank you,

Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all"
in your mail client.  To manage your subscriptions to this
and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at:

To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at:

Reply via email to