+1. Especially if you don't use "fake" mode of Nailgun, I don't know why would you even be copying legacy code to the new repo..
Thanks! On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:25 AM Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 08/17/2015 08:50 AM, Roman Prykhodchenko wrote: > > Hi Fuelers! > > > > I was working on enabling Python tests in Fuel Client to run on > > OpenStack CI and I figured out that we actually have a piece of > > legacy code which can be removed now. That piece is run_tests.sh > > file. For those who’s not aware, that script allows to run different > > tests under different environments. I don’t know how it was a > > thousand years ago when I was not involved to Fuel project, but the > > situation at this particular moment looks like that: > > > > - Tests are actually orchestrated by tox - The biggest job of > > run_tests.sh is to translate its options to tox’es options - The only > > useful job of run_tests.sh is to start Nailgun correctly for > > functional tests > > > > As you can see the profit of that script is tiny. However, the > > problems it brings are pretty much big and looks as follows: > > > > - It is unstable — tiniest changes to tests require big changes to > > the script - The CLI it provides is confusing - Working on that file > > looks like doing the same job that is already done in tox - Among the > > active Fuel Client’s community there are only a few guys who are > > proficient in bash enough, to support that script effectively > > > > > > My proposal is to extract the code responsible for starting Nailgun > > into to a small utility script and let tox do the rest by removing > > run_test.sh completely. That will bring us the following advantages: > > > > - No need to support a complex bash script. - Closer to being able to > > run functional tests on DSVM gates. - Test CLI will be more > > compatible with other OpenStack projects. > > > > I foresee a few questions and the answers for them follow: > > > > Q: How is verify-job from FuelCI going to run tests without that > > file? A: Fuel Client has its own job on FuelCI, so it will be just > > necessary to change the invocation there. > > > > Q: But run_test.sh is in all Fuel projects, shouldn’t we keep them > > all similar. A: Why does it have to be similar? This kind of > > difference is minor and it brings more advantages, than just having > > the same file. In fact the set of options in run_tests.sh is already > > different from run_tests.sh in fuel-web. > > > > Q: Why should we look ad other OpenStack projects? A: Fuel is living > > in the OpenStack ecosystem so being compatible with it is a big > > advantage. It’s also a must for going big tent. > > +1. > > Just make sure any documentation that might refer to run_tests.sh is > updated accordingly :) > > Best, > -jay > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- Mike Scherbakov #mihgen
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
