On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 9:08 AM Tom Barber <[email protected]> wrote:
> Its taken me about 2 weeks of on and off testing to get 4 unit tests > working, getting everything to play ball is hard, so it would be good! > Maybe I'll write a blog post about it once I'm done. > Fantastic! Do you have a link to these? Would love to see how these > > -------------- > > Director Meteorite.bi - Saiku Analytics Founder > Tel: +44(0)5603641316 > > (Thanks to the Saiku community we reached our Kickstart > <http://kickstarter.com/projects/2117053714/saiku-reporting-interactive-report-designer/> > goal, but you can always help by sponsoring the project > <http://www.meteorite.bi/products/saiku/sponsorship>) > > On 17 March 2016 at 12:24, Merlijn Sebrechts <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> As an aside; is there a good write-up somewhere about charm unit testing. >> I'd like to do this but I'm not sure how to do this. I am completely new to >> unit testing so I'm having a hard time to see how a good unittest for a >> Charm would look like and what exactly should be tested. >> >> 2016-03-17 1:52 GMT+01:00 Marco Ceppi <[email protected]>: >> >>> Hello everyone! >>> >>> This is an email I've been meaning to write for a while, and have >>> rewritten a few times now. With 2.0 on the horizon and the charm ecosystem >>> rapidly growing, I couldn't keep the idea to myself any longer. >>> >>> # tl;dr: >>> >>> We should stop writing Amulet tests in charms and instead only write >>> them Bundles and force charms to do unit-testing (when possible) and >>> promote that all charms be included in bundles in the store. >>> >>> # Problem >>> >>> Without making this a novel, charm-testing and amulet started before >>> bundles were even a construct in Juju with a spec written before Juju 1.0. >>> Since then, many new comers to the ecosystem have remarked how odd it is to >>> be writing deployment validations at the charm level. Indeed, as years have >>> gone by and new tools have sprung up it's become clear that; having an >>> author try to model all the permutations of a charms deployment and do the >>> physical deploys at that charm level are tedious and incomplete at best. >>> >>> With the explosion of layers and improvements to uniting test in charms >>> at that component level, I feel that continuing to create these bespoke >>> "bundles" via amulet in a single charm will not be a robust solution going >>> forward. As we sprint closer to Juju 2.0 we're seeing a higher demand for >>> assurance of working scenarios, and a sharp focus on quality at every >>> level. As such I'd like to propose the following policy changes: >>> >>> - All bundles must have tests before promulgation to the store >>> - All charms need to have comprehensive tests (unit or amulet) >>> - All charms should be included in a bundle >>> >>> I'll break down my reasoning and examples in the following sections: >>> >>> # All bundles must have tests before promulgation to the store >>> >>> Writing bundle tests with Amulet is actually a more compelling story >>> today than writing an Amulet test case for a charm. As an example, there's >>> a new ELK stack bundle being produced, here's what the test for that bundle >>> looks like: >>> https://github.com/juju-solutions/bundle-elk-stack/blob/master/tests/10-test-bundle >>> >>> This makes a lot of sense because it's asserting that the bundle is >>> working as expected by the Author who put the bundle together. It's also >>> loading the bundle.yaml as the deployment spec meaning as the bundle >>> evolves the tests will make sure they continue to run as expected. Also, >>> this could potentially be used in future smoke tests for charms being >>> updated if a CI process swaps out, say elasticsearch, for a newer version >>> of a charm being reviewed. We can assert that both the unittests in >>> elasticsearch work and it operates properly in an existing real world >>> solution a la the bundle. >>> >>> Additional examples: >>> - >>> https://github.com/juju-solutions/bundle-realtime-syslog-analytics/blob/master/tests/01-bundle.py >>> - >>> https://github.com/juju-solutions/bundle-apache-core-batch-processing/blob/master/tests/01-bundle.py >>> >>> # All charms need to have comprehensive tests (unit or amulet) >>> >>> This is just a clarification and more strongly typed policy change that >>> require charms have (preferred) unit tests or, if not applicable, then an >>> Amulet test. Bash doesn't really allow for unittesting, so in those >>> scenarios, Amulet tests would function as a valid testing case. >>> >>> There are also some charms which will not make sense as a bundle. One >>> example is the recently promulgated Fiche charm: >>> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~charmers/charms/trusty/fiche/trunk/view/head:/tests/10-deploy >>> It's >>> a standalone pastebin, but it's an awesome service that provides deployment >>> validation with an Amulet test. The test stands up the charm, exercises >>> configuration, and validates the service responds in an expected way. For >>> scenarios where a charm does not have a bundle an Amulet test would be >>> required. >>> >>> Any charm that currently includes an Amulet test is welcome to continue >>> keeping such a test. >>> >>> # All charms should be included in a bundle >>> >>> This last one is to underscore that charms need to serve a purpose. This >>> policy is written as not an absolute, but instead a strongly worded >>> suggestion as there are always charms that are exceptions to the rules. One >>> such example is the aforementioned Fiche charm which as a bundle would not >>> make as much sense, but is still a purposeful charm. >>> >>> That being said, most users coming to consume Juju are looking to solve >>> a problem. Bundles underscore solutions to problems that people can >>> consume, and get started quicker. >>> >>> As such, when new applications are charmed a test of "is this >>> application something that serves a clear purpose" having a bundle >>> submitted alongside the charm validates that claim and provides users a way >>> to immediately get started with a solution. >>> >>> # Conclusion >>> >>> These policy changes, once accepted, will be targeted at all charms and >>> bundles in Xenial as well as any new charm submitted after policy >>> acceptance date for trusty, and finally any charm currently under review >>> will be encouraged to adhere to the new policy but won't be required. >>> >>> # Action items >>> >>> I'm seeking feedback on this concept and welcome suggestions for >>> improvements, questions, dissenting opinions, and any other remarks as well >>> as votes from ~charmers and feedback from the community at large. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Marco Ceppi >>> >>> -- >>> Juju mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Juju mailing list >> [email protected] >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju >> >> >
-- Juju mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
