I just re-assigned DOVETAIL-351 https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOVETAIL-351 to 
myself from Bryan to come up with a standard set of vocabulary. (Bryan, hope 
you are ok with this.) I do agree there are a lot of loose use of terms that we 
need to quickly clean up. Many of such cases I know are from old/obsolete 
documents left over from Colorado though. We just didn’t have time to clean 
them up and refresh the docs yet.

With the question of calling it CVP vs. dovetail, I think C&C can weigh in. 
Personally, I prefer to distinguish a software tool from the program itself. 
Tools are just a means to an end. The test suite, on the other hand, is already 
named as compliance test suite. The only caution I would add is not to spend 
too much time renaming things unnecessarily.

Wenjing

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christopher 
Price
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 12:50 AM
To: TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV <[email protected]>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] CVP test framework references and 
identification

Hi Folks,

As I have been working on the test spec I have been explicit in how I have been 
referring to the CVP test objects and utilities.  I have noticed that we seem 
to lack a common approach to how we refer to this program in the dovetail 
project.

May I propose we establish some guidelines and apply them:
                We describe our activities as being in the context of the CVP 
(compliance and verification program)
                Our tools are to be described as “The CVP toolchain”
                The selected test cases and test areas should be referred to as 
the “CVP test suite” or “CVP tests”

Dovetail is a project in OPNFV that does not carry test cases or deliver into 
the projects, it is more is the place we structure and document how the CVP is 
achieved by the OPNFV community.  The toolchain being developed in dovetail is 
maybe not falling into that category, but that is more a short term bridging 
function until our test framework tools can bridge any needed gaps with regard 
to security protocols needed.

I would propose specifically like to see that:
                We do not refer to the “dovetail project” in our CVP documents 
or tools this is not important for the consumer.
                We do not call our tools the “dovetail tools” nor refer to 
“dovetail tests” as these should be referred to as CVP tools, processes and 
tests.

Cheers,
                Chris
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Reply via email to