Hi all,

In the context of this discussion I am wondering if one of the official goals 
of Functest is to provide common functionality to support developers in OPNFV 
to write functional tests? That was my understanding, but I might be wrong. In 
any case, the Functest team along with the broader community should have a 
clear common understanding of this.

Assuming this is the case, then the functionality which Functest provides 
constitutes an API. Typically, APIs exhibit some kind of stability along with 
some kind of deprecation process. It would in this case be beneficial for the 
broader community if such processes are defined and known.

If Functest is not considered a framework providing common functionality, well, 
then it is indeed a problem of SFC. However, I do not consider this a valuable 
approach because it might just result in every project creating similar code 
for the same tasks, e.g., measuring execution times as in Manuel’s case. 
Moreover, Brian’s statement that he is trying to avoid using Functest 
functionality in his projects doesn’t really feel right from a community 

Just my two cents as an observer.

Best regards

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of 
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2018 3:25 PM
To: Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com>; OPNFV-TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Could ways of working with testing frameworks 
be improved when working with master?

Hello Manuel,

In case of Functest, we are simply improving our code that why we are removing 
uncovered obsolete (and unused internally) functions.

As we take care of pylint output and coverage, we should stop maintaining 
modules/functions which are out of our standards and unused by Functest.

It’s well known that we are getting rid of openstack utils to leverage on snaps 
and we are removing unused functest utils
We have worked on SDNVPN about that point before and we should apply the same 
rules for SFC.
I don’t understand why Functest should host functions needed by SFC.

In fact this issue is on the client side (SFC) which still uses obsolete 
Functest functions and your email seems asking to block innovation.
I don’t think it’s an issue regarding APEX master or XCI for which this global 
improvement initiated from E is very helpful.

Be free to reuse this method in your tree as it could have belong to instead.


De : 
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] De la part de Manuel Buil
Envoyé : vendredi 2 février 2018 13:00
Objet : [opnfv-tech-discuss] Could ways of working with testing frameworks be 
improved when working with master?


As you know, the SFC project is currently testing openstack master, that means 
we need to use functest master in order to consume the lastest patches in the 
projects we use. Unfortunately, in the last weeks, we wasted quite some time 
trying to understand why suddenly the tests were not able to run and the cause 
was a change in the master branch of functest. For example, we are using the 
function "timethis" from functest_utils, which was removed by this patch: 
 and suddenly our tests are not working and we don't know whether there is an 

Functest is the framework we use for our tests and ideally, we (SFC project) 
would like to get some heads up before that change is done, so that we are 
warned and we don't have to waste time investigating what changed. I guess the 
same could be applied to other core testing frameworks like Yardstick. However, 
this is complicated and I am not sure if there is a good solution to achieve 
that level of communication without impacting the efficiency of 
funcatest/yardstick/... development. I have some ideas:

A) Functest/Yarstick leave the old functionality for a week adding a log saying 
"This is going to be deprecated, please check this patch: xxxx"

B) Add gates in functest/yardstick projects which run tests of their customer 
projects (as in, SFC is a customer of functest). This way, projects could be 
warned on time

C) Do nothing. Sorry, this is the consequence of consuming functest/yardstick 

D) ??

From what I heard in the TSC, Apex is going to join the XCI philosophy and 
allow working with the tip of master, so it seems to me that more functest and 
potentially yardstick users are going to hit this problem, that's why I believe 
it could be a good time to discuss possible solutions.

Please don't get me wrong, I am not trying to blame functest (or yardstick), I 
just want to share the problems we are having with the current ways of working 
and try to find a solution :)



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to