Hi Cedric, the general idea of the test case names in Dovetail is that every name should give away what a test is roughly doing and provide some simple form of categorization. We have hence renamed the test cases after the first release to get rid of the numbering which didn’t say anything about the purpose of a given test [1][2]. The new scheme is now “dovetail.<category>.<description>”.
Given this naming scheme, sdnvpn is a test case category which coincides with the project name. Technically that’s probably not a good name, but instead bgpvpn would be a better name. Moreover, during the time we worked on [2], we were thinking about how to include the name of the test framework in the test case name. We somehow didn’t follow this through, but given this discussion here it would make sense to change the naming scheme to <testframework>.<category>.<description> as the static dovetail prefix doesn’t add any value anyway. For example, dovetail.sdnvpn.foo would then be called functest.bgpvpn.foo. I need to check, though, if this renaming has an impact on our code. Regarding the VNF test cases, I hear your request. We are a little stretched on resources, so I cannot promise much. We might be able to help out after our release. [1] https://github.com/opnfv/dovetail/blob/stable/danube/dovetail/compliance/ovp.1.0.0.yml [2] https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/56223/ Cheers Georg From: Cedric OLLIVIER <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2018 10:47 PM To: Georg Kunz <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Dovetail testcase naming Hello, Could you please clarify why there are two different rules applied about Dovetail testcase names? Most of the testcases coming from OPNFV Test Frameworks are renamed Dovetail without the real OPNFV project supporting them (even if they are ran asis). If I'm not wrong, the only exception is SDNVPN. This exception seems even more strange because the testcases test the BGPVPN [1] API even if ODL is selected as backend. I don't understand why the same rule is not applied for the other OPNFV projects especially when their testcases are executed without any change. Supporting juju_epc and all VNFS are much more difficult than mainly copy/paste our docs and add few yml files [2] We would appreciate any little help from Dovetail about the VNF dev/support. Cédric [1] https://docs.openstack.org/networking-bgpvpn/latest/ [2] https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/57095/ [3] https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/59675/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#21641): https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/21641 Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/23844846/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
