You nailed it! Thank you.
The bindings, as well as the ansible-modules I am in the process of
developing are trained to be _nice_ to the api. So I would say, they
are ok to test the happy flow for some dedicated workflows.
But when it comes to testing with bad request, you probably need to
handcraft them.

On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 09:25:45 -0500
Grant Gainey <ggai...@redhat.com> wrote:

> The whole point to having generated bindings is to prevent a
> client-tool from passing bogus data into Pulp, failing early and
> loudly so the client-author can *fix their code/assumptions*. Yes,
> that does make it hard to use the generated bindings to test
> bad-data-cases - but to me, that's just the price to be paid for the
> bindings doing the right thing in the real-world case of "I'm trying
> to write a tool to use Pulp, not to break it".
> 
> I would be *very* hesitant to make changes that make it easier to
> sneak "bad data" through the bindings-interfaces.
> 
> Just my $0.02
> G

Attachment: pgp3d5fGzxqJ0.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Reply via email to