Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/5] docs: api_extension: Remove note to extend libvirt-TCK
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 03:59:26PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 15:25:17 +0200, Erik Skultety wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:50:33AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote: > > > It probably does not make sense to do tests using that toolkit any more. > > > > At first I thought so too, I even thought that there hasn't been any > > commits to > > the repo for a long time, it turned out I was wrong, there's still some work > > going on, so I don't think we should abandon it completely. The fact that I > > (and most probably you too - sorry, I just assumed your testing habits) > > don't > > use it for testing doesn't mean, we should discourage others from giving the > > framework a try, we're not mandating the usage so I don't see an issue with > > the. With that said, once we have a proper continuous integration running > > upstream, then I'd say we should start encouraging users to use the avocado > > framework instead. However, for the time being, it's a NACK from me, maybe > > Dan > > has a different feeling about this. > > Since the last non-maintenance commit for this section was in 2013, I > don't think that mentioning any particular project makes sense. Avocado > may become obsolete in another 5 years and I doubt that anybody will > bother to update this document for the new hip project's name. Everything will eventually become out-dated and by following that logic, the only documentation we'd be left with is the code - "Documentation done right". I disagree, since as I pointed out, we're not forcing anyone, we're merely mentioning that such a thing still exists. > > I'm also okay just dropping this and making any poor soul which will > follow that document to resolve any obsolete part by themselves. Yep, let them make the decision for themselves, it's more than likely that a thought of using it won't even cross their minds, fine by me. Erik -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/5] docs: api_extension: Remove note to extend libvirt-TCK
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 15:25:17 +0200, Erik Skultety wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:50:33AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote: > > It probably does not make sense to do tests using that toolkit any more. > > At first I thought so too, I even thought that there hasn't been any commits > to > the repo for a long time, it turned out I was wrong, there's still some work > going on, so I don't think we should abandon it completely. The fact that I > (and most probably you too - sorry, I just assumed your testing habits) don't > use it for testing doesn't mean, we should discourage others from giving the > framework a try, we're not mandating the usage so I don't see an issue with > the. With that said, once we have a proper continuous integration running > upstream, then I'd say we should start encouraging users to use the avocado > framework instead. However, for the time being, it's a NACK from me, maybe Dan > has a different feeling about this. Since the last non-maintenance commit for this section was in 2013, I don't think that mentioning any particular project makes sense. Avocado may become obsolete in another 5 years and I doubt that anybody will bother to update this document for the new hip project's name. I'm also okay just dropping this and making any poor soul which will follow that document to resolve any obsolete part by themselves. signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/5] docs: api_extension: Remove note to extend libvirt-TCK
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:50:33AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote: > It probably does not make sense to do tests using that toolkit any more. At first I thought so too, I even thought that there hasn't been any commits to the repo for a long time, it turned out I was wrong, there's still some work going on, so I don't think we should abandon it completely. The fact that I (and most probably you too - sorry, I just assumed your testing habits) don't use it for testing doesn't mean, we should discourage others from giving the framework a try, we're not mandating the usage so I don't see an issue with the. With that said, once we have a proper continuous integration running upstream, then I'd say we should start encouraging users to use the avocado framework instead. However, for the time being, it's a NACK from me, maybe Dan has a different feeling about this. Erik -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
[libvirt] [PATCH 4/5] docs: api_extension: Remove note to extend libvirt-TCK
It probably does not make sense to do tests using that toolkit any more. Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa --- docs/api_extension.html.in | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/api_extension.html.in b/docs/api_extension.html.in index d2c7fd6cfb..ce2f457b63 100644 --- a/docs/api_extension.html.in +++ b/docs/api_extension.html.in @@ -363,9 +363,7 @@ Once you have working functionality, run make check and make syntax-check on each patch of the series before submitting - patches. It may also be worth writing tests for the libvirt-TCK - testsuite to exercise your new API, although those patches are - not kept in the libvirt repository. + patches. -- 2.16.2 -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
