Luke Kanies wrote:
>
> Essentially, all new tests should be in rspec, and if you're modifying
> existing behaviour, if at all possible the tests for the existing
> behaviour should be moved to rspec.
>
Not really modifying behavior. (#2689 feature patch) Only switching to
another ruby binding. So the classes should have an identical behavior.
> We can help if you have trouble with this.
>
>
In the previous patch I made I have modified the test in
test/util/metric.rb. The problem there was that the test required a
folder to exists (which puppet creates somewhere else, not sure where).
Should I still include this change in the patch?
Yesterday, while making the requested changes for the patch, I stumbled
upon the rspec tests, specifically:
in spec/unit/util/metric.rb
# LAK: I'm not taking the time to develop these tests right now.
# I expect they should actually be extracted into a separate class
# anyway.
it "should be able to graph metrics using RRDTool"
it "should be able to create a new RRDTool database"
it "should be able to store metrics into an RRDTool database"
I think I can port all this stuff and check if anything throws an
exception, but I can't find out if the graphed png and/or database is
correct.
Not sure how to write them clean, in the original test this was done
with about 70 lines of code, which seems a lot for how rspec should be
done.
How should I extract it intro separate classes (naming, files, what
should still go in the new file, what in the old)?
Last, but not least, should I do this in one commit (1 patch e-mail) or
split it in functionality changes, test changes, documentation.
Silviu
PS thank you for taking the time
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
