> + assertPosted(DEFAULT_REGION,
> "Action=DescribePlacementGroups&GroupName.1=jclouds%23sg-3c6ef654%23us-east-1");
> + assertPosted(DEFAULT_REGION,
> "Action=DeletePlacementGroup&GroupName=jclouds%23sg-3c6ef654%23us-east-1");
> + assertPosted(DEFAULT_REGION,
> "Action=DescribePlacementGroups&GroupName.1=jclouds%23sg-3c6ef654%23us-east-1");
> + }
> +
> + public void
> deleteIncidentalResourcesGivingDependencyViolationForSecurityGroup() throws
> Exception {
> +
> runDeleteIncidentalResourcesGivingErrForSecurityGroup("DependencyViolation");
> + }
> +
> + public void deleteIncidentalResourcesGivingInUseForSecurityGroup() throws
> Exception {
> +
> runDeleteIncidentalResourcesGivingErrForSecurityGroup("InvalidGroup.InUse");
> + }
> +
> + protected void
> runDeleteIncidentalResourcesGivingErrForSecurityGroup(String errCode) throws
> Exception {
> + // Complicated dispatcher is needed because cleanUpIncidentalResources
> will retry an unpredictable
> + // number of times (because it is time-based, for 3 seconds - not
> configurable).
I understand what you mean, but given that you've had to struggle with this
test to make it work with the current implementation (because it is not a good
one), I think it is reasonable to propose to fix and improve the code as soon
as we find ourselves having to workaround it.
I know this might not be directly related to the change in the error parser,
but if we just *fix stuff* without trying to make the related code better,
we'll just be growing the codebase in a way that will make it harder to
maintain and evolve in the future. In this case, there is just a test that
calls code that is not test friendly. Instead of making the test complex, it is
better to fix that code, as it should be pretty straightforward.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/629/files#r22925462
