[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-08-29 Thread Marco Ceppi
Blueprint changed by Marco Ceppi:

Work items changed:
  Work items:
  [marcoceppi] Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can 
write tests against (embedded in the charm) (amulet): INPROGRESS
  [marcoceppi] Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on success it is a 
candidate for review: POSTPONED
  [marcoceppi] Develop Juju test plugin (ie juju test): DONE
  [marcoceppi] Modify charm tools to capture a stub integration test: INPROGRESS
- Include charm-helper library for all charmers: TODO
+ Include charm-helper library for all charmers: DONE

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs


[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-08-29 Thread Marco Ceppi
Blueprint changed by Marco Ceppi:

Work items changed:
  Work items:
  [marcoceppi] Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can 
write tests against (embedded in the charm) (amulet): INPROGRESS
- [marcoceppi] Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on success it is a 
candidate for review: TODO
+ [marcoceppi] Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on success it is a 
candidate for review: POSTPONED
  [marcoceppi] Develop Juju test plugin (ie juju test): DONE
  [marcoceppi] Modify charm tools to capture a stub integration test: INPROGRESS
  Include charm-helper library for all charmers: TODO

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs


[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-07-11 Thread Marco Ceppi
Blueprint changed by Marco Ceppi:

Work items changed:
  Work items:
- Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can write tests 
against (embedded in the charm): TODO
- Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on success it is a candidate for 
review: TODO
- Develop Juju test plugin (ie juju test): TODO
- Modify charm tools to capture a stub integration test: TODO
+ [marcoceppi] Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can 
write tests against (embedded in the charm) (amulet): INPROGRESS
+ [marcoceppi] Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on success it is a 
candidate for review: TODO
+ [marcoceppi] Develop Juju test plugin (ie juju test): DONE
+ [marcoceppi] Modify charm tools to capture a stub integration test: INPROGRESS
  Include charm-helper library for all charmers: TODO

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs


[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-16 Thread Antonio Rosales
Blueprint changed by Antonio Rosales:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
  
  Two modes of testing:
   -Unit (does the charm start, and report ready)
   -Workload (test the charms relations, and pushing data)
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
  
  William is a juju user who wishes to know a charms current stability
  
  Saul is patching a charm and wants to in sure his changes are work with
  current tests
  
  Laura is a charm maintainer and wants to add tests to in sure her charm
  is stable
  
  Kara is a charm maintainer and needs to know when her charm is broken
  
  Lee is a charmer who, while reviewing charm submissions, needs to know
  if these changes break backwards compatibility with currently deployed
  services
  
  Gaius is a charm maintainer from an upstream project and needs an easy
  way to learn how to write tests for his charm
  
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
  
  - Charm tester/charm tester control will work with gojuju for at least
  graph testing
  
  [RISKS]
  
  - Relying soley on graph testing may result in inaccurate test results due 
to lack of embedded tests
  - Making tests too complicated may result in low adoption rate of embedded 
testing
  
  [IN SCOPE]
  
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
  
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
  
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
- (Needs spec and WI definition) -[a.rosales; 12-DEC-2012]
+ [Notes]
+ 
+ UDS 1305 notes: http://pad.ubuntu.com/ep/pad/view/uds-1305-servercloud-s
+ -juju-charm-testing/latest
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
  
  Charm-Runner integration:
   - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
  
  Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
   - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient
- 
  
  ---
  
  [notes from cloudsprint 2013-05]
  Topics to cover
  Current Testing
  Current todos
  Experiences from IS
  Ideas
  
  Review charm policy to include:
  Test must pass tests
  Charm must have tests
  
  We want embedded tests!
  All tests live in the charm
  Functional Tests
  /test (in charm)
  Integration
  /test.d (in charm)
  How to make it low entry for charmers to add tests
  charm create tests (charm-tools make a stub _simple_ test)
  leverage libraries, and possibly a deployment (dare I say declarative) 
testing lang.
  Sidnei mocks all the juju calls (U1 testing)
  have a library that stubs this for you.
  pull this into charm-helper library
  leverage Go-watch
  leverage charm testing with charm upgrade
  
  Story Points: (added to Blueprint work item)
  Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can write tests 
against 

[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-16 Thread Antonio Rosales
Blueprint changed by Antonio Rosales:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
  
  Two modes of testing:
   -Unit (does the charm start, and report ready)
   -Workload (test the charms relations, and pushing data)
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
  
  William is a juju user who wishes to know a charms current stability
  
  Saul is patching a charm and wants to in sure his changes are work with
  current tests
  
  Laura is a charm maintainer and wants to add tests to in sure her charm
  is stable
  
  Kara is a charm maintainer and needs to know when her charm is broken
  
  Lee is a charmer who, while reviewing charm submissions, needs to know
  if these changes break backwards compatibility with currently deployed
  services
  
  Gaius is a charm maintainer from an upstream project and needs an easy
  way to learn how to write tests for his charm
  
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
  
  - Charm tester/charm tester control will work with gojuju for at least
  graph testing
  
  [RISKS]
  
  - Relying soley on graph testing may result in inaccurate test results due 
to lack of embedded tests
  - Making tests too complicated may result in low adoption rate of embedded 
testing
  
  [IN SCOPE]
  
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
  
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
  
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
- [Notes]
+ [NOTES]
  
  UDS 1305 notes: http://pad.ubuntu.com/ep/pad/view/uds-1305-servercloud-s
  -juju-charm-testing/latest
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
  
  Charm-Runner integration:
   - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
  
  Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
   - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient
  
  ---
  
  [notes from cloudsprint 2013-05]
  Topics to cover
  Current Testing
  Current todos
  Experiences from IS
  Ideas
  
  Review charm policy to include:
  Test must pass tests
  Charm must have tests
  
  We want embedded tests!
  All tests live in the charm
  Functional Tests
  /test (in charm)
  Integration
  /test.d (in charm)
  How to make it low entry for charmers to add tests
  charm create tests (charm-tools make a stub _simple_ test)
  leverage libraries, and possibly a deployment (dare I say declarative) 
testing lang.
  Sidnei mocks all the juju calls (U1 testing)
  have a library that stubs this for you.
  pull this into charm-helper library
  leverage Go-watch
  leverage charm testing with charm upgrade

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or 

[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-16 Thread Marco Ceppi
Blueprint changed by Marco Ceppi:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
  
  Two modes of testing:
   -Unit (does the charm start, and report ready)
   -Workload (test the charms relations, and pushing data)
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
  
  William is a juju user who wishes to know a charms current stability
  
- Saul is patching a charm and wants to in sure his changes are work with
+ Saul is patching a charm and wants to insure his changes work with the
  current tests
  
- Laura is a charm maintainer and wants to add tests to in sure her charm
+ Laura is a charm maintainer and wants to add tests to insure her charm
  is stable
  
  Kara is a charm maintainer and needs to know when her charm is broken
  
  Lee is a charmer who, while reviewing charm submissions, needs to know
  if these changes break backwards compatibility with currently deployed
  services
  
  Gaius is a charm maintainer from an upstream project and needs an easy
  way to learn how to write tests for his charm
  
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
  
  - Charm tester/charm tester control will work with gojuju for at least
  graph testing
  
  [RISKS]
  
  - Relying soley on graph testing may result in inaccurate test results due 
to lack of embedded tests
  - Making tests too complicated may result in low adoption rate of embedded 
testing
  
  [IN SCOPE]
  
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
  
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
  
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
  [NOTES]
  
  UDS 1305 notes: http://pad.ubuntu.com/ep/pad/view/uds-1305-servercloud-s
  -juju-charm-testing/latest
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
  
  Charm-Runner integration:
   - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
  
  Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
   - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient
  
  ---
  
  [notes from cloudsprint 2013-05]
  Topics to cover
  Current Testing
  Current todos
  Experiences from IS
  Ideas
  
  Review charm policy to include:
  Test must pass tests
  Charm must have tests
  
  We want embedded tests!
  All tests live in the charm
  Functional Tests
  /test (in charm)
  Integration
  /test.d (in charm)
  How to make it low entry for charmers to add tests
  charm create tests (charm-tools make a stub _simple_ test)
  leverage libraries, and possibly a deployment (dare I say declarative) 
testing lang.
  Sidnei mocks all the juju calls (U1 testing)
  have a library that stubs this for you.
  pull this into charm-helper library
  leverage Go-watch
  leverage charm testing with charm upgrade

-- 
Juju Charm Testing

[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-16 Thread Antonio Rosales
Blueprint changed by Antonio Rosales:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
  
  Two modes of testing:
   -Unit (does the charm start, and report ready)
   -Workload (test the charms relations, and pushing data)
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
  
  William is a juju user who wishes to know a charms current stability
  
  Saul is patching a charm and wants to in sure his changes are work with
  current tests
  
  Laura is a charm maintainer and wants to add tests to in sure her charm
  is stable
  
  Kara is a charm maintainer and needs to know when her charm is broken
  
  Lee is a charmer who, while reviewing charm submissions, needs to know
  if these changes break backwards compatibility with currently deployed
  services
  
  Gaius is a charm maintainer from an upstream project and needs an easy
  way to learn how to write tests for his charm
  
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
  
  - Charm tester/charm tester control will work with gojuju for at least
  graph testing
  
  [RISKS]
  
  - Relying soley on graph testing may result in inaccurate test results due 
to lack of embedded tests
  - Making tests too complicated may result in low adoption rate of embedded 
testing
  
  [IN SCOPE]
  
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
  
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
  
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
  [Notes]
  
  UDS 1305 notes: http://pad.ubuntu.com/ep/pad/view/uds-1305-servercloud-s
  -juju-charm-testing/latest
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
  
  Charm-Runner integration:
   - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
  
  Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
   - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient
  
  ---
  
  [notes from cloudsprint 2013-05]
  Topics to cover
  Current Testing
  Current todos
  Experiences from IS
  Ideas
  
  Review charm policy to include:
  Test must pass tests
  Charm must have tests
  
  We want embedded tests!
  All tests live in the charm
  Functional Tests
  /test (in charm)
  Integration
  /test.d (in charm)
  How to make it low entry for charmers to add tests
  charm create tests (charm-tools make a stub _simple_ test)
  leverage libraries, and possibly a deployment (dare I say declarative) 
testing lang.
  Sidnei mocks all the juju calls (U1 testing)
  have a library that stubs this for you.
  pull this into charm-helper library
  leverage Go-watch
  leverage charm testing with charm upgrade
- 
- Story Points: (added to Blueprint work item)
- Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can write tests 
against (embedded in the charm).
- Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on 

[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-10 Thread Mark Mims
Blueprint changed by Mark Mims:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
  
  Two modes of testing:
   -Unit (does the charm start, and report ready)
   -Workload (test the charms relations, and pushing data)
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
  
  William is a juju user who wishes to know a charms current stability
  
  Saul is patching a charm and wants to in sure his changes are work with
  current tests
  
  Laura is a charm maintainer and wants to add tests to in sure her charm
  is stable
  
  Kara is a charm maintainer and needs to know when her charm is broken
  
  Lee is a charmer who, while reviewing charm submissions, needs to know
  if these changes break backwards compatibility with currently deployed
  services
  
  Gaius is a charm maintainer from an upstream project and needs an easy
  way to learn how to write tests for his charm
  
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
  
  - Charm tester/charm tester control will work with gojuju for at least
  graph testing
  
  [RISKS]
  
  - Relying soley on graph testing may result in inaccurate test results due 
to lack of embedded tests
  - Making tests too complicated may result in low adoption rate of embedded 
testing
  
  [IN SCOPE]
  
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
  
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
  
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
  (Needs spec and WI definition) -[a.rosales; 12-DEC-2012]
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
  
  Charm-Runner integration:
   - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
  
  Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
   - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient
+ 
+ 
+ ---
+ 
+ [notes from cloudsprint 2013-05]
+ Topics to cover
+ Current Testing
+ Current todos
+ Experiences from IS
+ Ideas
+ 
+ Review charm policy to include:
+ Test must pass tests
+ Charm must have tests
+ 
+ We want embedded tests!
+ All tests live in the charm
+ Functional Tests
+ /test (in charm)
+ Integration
+ /test.d (in charm)
+ How to make it low entry for charmers to add tests
+ charm create tests (charm-tools make a stub _simple_ test)
+ leverage libraries, and possibly a deployment (dare I say declarative) 
testing lang.
+ Sidnei mocks all the juju calls (U1 testing)
+ have a library that stubs this for you.
+ pull this into charm-helper library
+ leverage Go-watch
+ leverage charm testing with charm upgrade
+ 
+ Story Points: (added to Blueprint work item)
+ Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can write tests 
against (embedded in the charm).
+ Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on success it is a candidate for review
+ Develop Juju test 

[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-07 Thread Antonio Rosales
Blueprint changed by Antonio Rosales:

Work items set to:
Work items:
Integration Testing includes framework that charm authors can write tests 
against (embedded in the charm): TODO
Jenkins testing on new merge proposal, on success it is a candidate for review: 
TODO
Develop Juju test plugin (ie juju test): TODO
Modify charm tools to capture a stub integration test: TODO
Include charm-helper library for all charmers: TODO

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs


[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-05 Thread Marco Ceppi
Blueprint changed by Marco Ceppi:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
  
  Two modes of testing:
   -Unit (does the charm start, and report ready)
   -Workload (test the charms relations, and pushing data)
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
+ 
+ William is a juju user who wishes to know a charms current stability
+ 
+ Saul is patching a charm and wants to in sure his changes are work with
+ current tests
+ 
+ Laura is a charm maintainer and wants to add tests to in sure her charm
+ is stable
+ 
+ Kara is a charm maintainer and needs to know when her charm is broken
+ 
+ Lee is a charmer who, while reviewing charm submissions, needs to know
+ if these changes break backwards compatibility with currently deployed
+ services
+ 
+ Gaius is a charm maintainer from an upstream project and needs an easy
+ way to learn how to write tests for his charm
+ 
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
+ 
+ - Charm tester/charm tester control will work with gojuju for at least
+ graph testing
+ 
  [RISKS]
+ 
+ - Relying soley on graph testing may result in inaccurate test results due 
to lack of embedded tests
+ - Making tests too complicated may result in low adoption rate of embedded 
testing
+ 
  [IN SCOPE]
+ 
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
+ 
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
+ 
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
  (Needs spec and WI definition) -[a.rosales; 12-DEC-2012]
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
  
  Charm-Runner integration:
   - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
  
  Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
   - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs


[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-02 Thread Antonio Rosales
Blueprint changed by Antonio Rosales:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
+ 
+ Two modes of testing:
+  -Unit (does the charm start, and report ready)
+  -Workload (test the charms relations, and pushing data)
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
  [RISKS]
  [IN SCOPE]
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
  (Needs spec and WI definition) -[a.rosales; 12-DEC-2012]
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
  
  Charm-Runner integration:
-  - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
+  - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
  
  Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
-  - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient
+  - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs


[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-05-01 Thread Antonio Rosales
Blueprint changed by Antonio Rosales:

Whiteboard changed:
  Discussion:
   *Bug submission on charm failure.
   *Define a process around how charm maintainers respond to test failures and 
subsequent bugs. Can a user run a manual test and submit the test back to the 
bug report to update testing status to green.
   *Enable Autocharm tester to be more resilient against provider failures, and 
Jenkins usage.
   simulate provider failure, and be able to recover: $ juju ssh MACHINE 
sudo shutdown now
   * Define WIs to execute auto charm testing on Go.
   * Continuous Integration (also will help with gating on charm commits)
   * Juju Testing Blogging
   * Juju testing communication to Juju lists.
   * Work on integrating/fixing Charm runner (graph testing/ dependency/env set 
up testing).
  
  Add a Jenkins workflow to run a charm or a set of charms in the following LXC 
environments:
   -raring container on raring host
   -raring container on precise host
   -precise container on raring host
   -precise container on precise host
  
  Reference Links:
   *Charm Test Spec [html] https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/charm-tests.html
   * Charm Test Spec [source] 
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~juju/juju/docs/view/head:/source/charm-tests.rst
   * CharmTester Charm http://jujucharms.com/~mark-mims/oneiric/charmtester
   * Charm Runner: https://launchpad.net/charmrunner
   * Jenkins Charm Testing: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Charms/
  
  [USER STORIES]
  [ASSUMPTIONS]
  [RISKS]
  [IN SCOPE]
  [OUT OF SCOPE]
  [USER ACCEPTANCE]
  [RELEASE NOTE/BLOG]
  
  (Needs spec and WI definition) -[a.rosales; 12-DEC-2012]
  
  === UDS 1303 Notes ===
  Pad: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1303-servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing
  
  Question:
  Is there a way in meta-data to explicitly state provider support.
  -Example: Ceph: Does cloud provider have block support
  -More broadly stated does the cloud provider have the capabilities the 
charm needs
  
  Idea:
    -In charm testing status be able to show that a charm failure can be a 
result of the provider not providing the needed capabilities, ie the Ceph charm 
fails on a provider because it does not support object store.
    -Make interface usage more verbose in the charm description.
    -Need a rule/spec on how a interface should be implemented
  -Need to investigate possible enforment of interfaces
   -**Have the testing framework iterate through the operational deployment 
requirments.
  
  Interfaces doc link broken:
    -Example: http://jujucharms.com/interfaces/ceph-client  Interface doc link 
broken:
    https://juju.ubuntu.com/Interfaces/ceph-client -- broken
  
  Meta-language testing (http://paste.ubuntu.com/5588570/):
  
  Lanugage suggestions:
  http://lettuce.it/
  http://cukes.info/
+ 
+ Charm-Runner integration:
+  - https://launchpad.net/juju-deployer
+ 
+ Wrap Go/Py juju client status:
+  - https://launchpad.net/python-jujuclient

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs


[Blueprint servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing] Juju Charm Testing

2013-04-25 Thread Antonio Rosales
Blueprint changed by Antonio Rosales:

Name: servercloud-r-juju-charm-testing = servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Juju Charm Testing
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-s-juju-charm-testing

-- 
Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list
Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs