Zygmunt Krynicki <[email protected]> writes: > W dniu 18.10.2012 19:36, Andy Doan pisze: >> On 10/18/2012 12:03 PM, Zygmunt Krynicki wrote: >>> W dniu 18.10.2012 16:28, Abner Silva pisze: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>> >>> So on a tangent somewhat, I've started a document (feel free to >>> contribute) on >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WxWJ5kQj3zVKB45fOOEpk2udrRM1Z0RgHly_3KQTfjc/edit >>> >>> >> Is there a reason you created new doc rather than using the wiki page >> Michael had created[1]. He had placed a comments section at the end for >> this type of thing. >> >> 1. https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/LAVA/Specs/TestCaseManagement > > Not really, no, after thinking about it now, partially yes. > > I did not want to diverge the topic of the Connect discussion which may > or may not be actually aiming at a construction of a unaffiliated test > repository. The discussion in the wiki is specific to LAVA and I'd like > to document what may be needed by various teams that I'm familiar with > as well as explicitly open for others (in the weak term of comments > which are somewhat less-than-perfect)
I think I agree with this, tbh. It's an interesting idea that may meet our needs, but we should concentrate on explicating our needs first. > Still, I'd like to keep this separate but open for discussion. Do you > think you would consider working on a non-lava-specific test repository > during the next cycle? If so then I would gladly move the spec to the > test case management wiki that mwhudson created. I think it depends on the nature of the solution. If the solution mostly consists of a protocol definition, I would think that the lava test repository would probably be a part of the same lava server process/database we already have. But not completely sure. Cheers, mwh _______________________________________________ linaro-validation mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
