On Wed 18 Sep 2013 12:34:46 PM CEST, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On 09/18/2013 03:37 PM, Martina Kollarova wrote:
There is a lack of design documentation and specification in the blueprints,
creating test
plans is problematic and requires a lot of communication with the developers. I
was
wondering whether we could partially remedy this by creating a place where we
could share
test plans - a place to add comments, point out problems and figure out the
weak points of
the features.
These test plans wouldn't be meant for documenting the
existing tests (documenting 800+ test cases would be impossible
anyway), just as a means of communication.
My current solution is github + text files[1]. I chose using github because
it's more
likely to be actually used by developers. Another alternative would be the
wiki, but I
think the code-like nature of test plans would profit from using the same tools
as for
code. Putting them right into the blueprints would be problematic, as it
doesn't support
formatting, but we can link them there.
+1
FWIW, I always prefer text files + git based approach. See more below.
Are there perhaps some better solutions for this? Would it be worth our time to
try this?
I think, yes.
There was a prior discussion[*] on this topic a couple of months ago -- read
complete
thread, if you have patience.
I noted my 02 cents on why plain text (obvious, but just spelled out),
reposting here:
(1) Text file are fast, easy to manage. I bet, they'll still be here 50 years
later! Bulky "management systems" - I doubt that.
(2) Works well over bad internet connections/remotely (I often work w/ a 2GB
usb internet card). We can use tmux/screen session on a remote machine &
work
peacefully.
(3) You can send patches, and apply them via the venerable git (and do all
other magic).
(4) Most (linux) developers are averse to clicky things. I've never seen
really happy developers reviewing tests from a heavy clickety management
system.
However, they're (some) happy to contribute tests if it's based on
text files using git.
Exactly my reasoning. I think most of developers are even averse to
editing wiki pages.
(5) OpenStack uses rST (for all its README & docs & everywhere else).
But, I'm aware, it's not the same as tests.
I'm actually using rST formatting in them.
(6) Add your own...
[*] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-qa/2013-May/000356.html
--
irc: mkollaro
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
