Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On 11/06/2014 05:00 PM, Scott Poore wrote: - Original Message - From: Petr Viktorin pvikt...@redhat.com [...] I've opened a ticket to get the project space for the BeakerLib plugin: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4589 When that's done I'll point the package metadata to there, push to PyPI and open a Fedora review request. Awesome. Thanks, Petr. While we wait, it's available here: https://github.com/encukou/pytest-beakerlib https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/pviktori/pytest-beakerlib Mind if I pass this on to some other QE teams that might be interested? Not at all, go ahead! You might want to wait until the project gets its permanent home, though. Do we need a version for EL 6? I'd need to check the pytest versions there, and build a newer pytest if necessary. Yes, I think we will want an EL6 version as well at least at some point. Let me know when that point comes :) The second part is the multi-host framework. I've looked at what parts are applicable to other projects than IPA, and came up with an initial design/README here: https://github.com/encukou/pytest-multihost I'll add a concrete example, code, and patches for IPA, soon. This is the paramiko/openssh stuff you've mentioned before right? I think this is the other piece I'd be very interested in. Yup, that's what it is. IPA also has/will have a plugin to run tests within a class in source order (respecting inheritance), rather than in pytest's unspecified order (usually alphabetically, IIRC). It can be extracted as well if there's interest. When you say in source order here, you mean source code order? So, we could actually order tests in the file as we see fit instead of relying on naming to define execution order? Yes. (Except it orders per class, not per source file.) It's not good practice to rely on test order, but it works for integration tests with big setup costs. Would this affect use of the built in setup/teardown fixtures? Or we should just stay away from those anyway? I'm not sure what you mean by built in setup/teardown fixtures? Anyway it should be safe, unless you use another test reordering plugin as well. (e.g. there's a 3rd party plugin for distributed running of tests, using that would not be a good idea) -- Petr³ ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On 11/03/2014 04:07 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: Hello! There's been some interest in releasing pieces of FreeIPA's testing infrastructure so it can be reused in other projects. I will soon take the pytest-beakerlib plugin (currently in my patch 0672), and making a stand-alone project out of it. Later I'll extract the common pieces of the integration testign framework, and release that independently. Thanks for the discussion, everyone. I've opened a ticket to get the project space for the BeakerLib plugin: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4589 When that's done I'll point the package metadata to there, push to PyPI and open a Fedora review request. While we wait, it's available here: https://github.com/encukou/pytest-beakerlib https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/pviktori/pytest-beakerlib Do we need a version for EL 6? I'd need to check the pytest versions there, and build a newer pytest if necessary. The second part is the multi-host framework. I've looked at what parts are applicable to other projects than IPA, and came up with an initial design/README here: https://github.com/encukou/pytest-multihost I'll add a concrete example, code, and patches for IPA, soon. IPA also has/will have a plugin to run tests within a class in source order (respecting inheritance), rather than in pytest's unspecified order (usually alphabetically, IIRC). It can be extracted as well if there's interest. -- Petr³ ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
- Original Message - From: Petr Viktorin pvikt...@redhat.com To: freeipa-devel@redhat.com Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2014 7:29:31 AM Subject: Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects On 11/03/2014 04:07 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: Hello! There's been some interest in releasing pieces of FreeIPA's testing infrastructure so it can be reused in other projects. I will soon take the pytest-beakerlib plugin (currently in my patch 0672), and making a stand-alone project out of it. Later I'll extract the common pieces of the integration testign framework, and release that independently. Thanks for the discussion, everyone. I've opened a ticket to get the project space for the BeakerLib plugin: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4589 When that's done I'll point the package metadata to there, push to PyPI and open a Fedora review request. Awesome. Thanks, Petr. While we wait, it's available here: https://github.com/encukou/pytest-beakerlib https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/pviktori/pytest-beakerlib Mind if I pass this on to some other QE teams that might be interested? Do we need a version for EL 6? I'd need to check the pytest versions there, and build a newer pytest if necessary. Yes, I think we will want an EL6 version as well at least at some point. The second part is the multi-host framework. I've looked at what parts are applicable to other projects than IPA, and came up with an initial design/README here: https://github.com/encukou/pytest-multihost I'll add a concrete example, code, and patches for IPA, soon. This is the paramiko/openssh stuff you've mentioned before right? I think this is the other piece I'd be very interested in. IPA also has/will have a plugin to run tests within a class in source order (respecting inheritance), rather than in pytest's unspecified order (usually alphabetically, IIRC). It can be extracted as well if there's interest. When you say in source order here, you mean source code order? So, we could actually order tests in the file as we see fit instead of relying on naming to define execution order? Would this affect use of the built in setup/teardown fixtures? Or we should just stay away from those anyway? Thanks, Petr. Scott -- Petr³ ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On 3.11.2014 16:47, Rob Crittenden wrote: Petr Viktorin wrote: Hello! There's been some interest in releasing pieces of FreeIPA's testing infrastructure so it can be reused in other projects. I will soon take the pytest-beakerlib plugin (currently in my patch 0672), and making a stand-alone project out of it. Later I'll extract the common pieces of the integration testign framework, and release that independently. Do we want projects projects like these to be hosted on Fedorahosted? That would be the 100% open-source solution. Or do we want to put it under a freeipa organization on Github, since we're more likely to get external contributors there? Why do you think it would get more contributors from github? Because yet another account isn't required, or the contributor process is perhaps better understood (via pull requests)? IMHO yes. Even for me it is much easier to quickly do - git clone - edit source - git push - create pull request (*this is the same for every project hosted on Github*) instead of - git clone - edit source (re-do following again for every single project) - hunt submission how-to - join mailing list/create account in project's tracker - prepare patch in project's format-of-choice - send patch Or both? (Would we want to officially mirror the project to Github from FH?) I'd be in favor of fedorahosted because you get a tracker and wiki as well, and having the repo there would round things out. rob -- Petr^2 Spacek ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On 11/03/2014 04:47 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote: Petr Viktorin wrote: Hello! There's been some interest in releasing pieces of FreeIPA's testing infrastructure so it can be reused in other projects. I will soon take the pytest-beakerlib plugin (currently in my patch 0672), and making a stand-alone project out of it. Later I'll extract the common pieces of the integration testing framework, and release that independently. Do we want projects projects like these to be hosted on Fedorahosted? That would be the 100% open-source solution. Or do we want to put it under a freeipa organization on Github, since we're more likely to get external contributors there? Why do you think it would get more contributors from github? Because yet another account isn't required, or the contributor process is perhaps better understood (via pull requests)? Both. The community is larger (i.e. contributors are likely to already have an account on Github), and the contribution process is nowadays more familiar to most people. And I'm not talking about a proprietary process here: the pull request process is publish a Git repo, and nag people to merge from it. It's built into Git itself – see git-request-pull(1). Github makes this easy, and adds a Web UI and some inevitable (but optional) proprietary perks. But underneath it's still Git and e-mail if you care to use those. Or both? (Would we want to officially mirror the project to Github from FH?) I'd be in favor of fedorahosted because you get a tracker and wiki as well, and having the repo there would round things out. Yeah, the tracker is a reason for FH. Github does host git-backed wikis using an open-source backend, but it doesn't have an acceptable bug tracker. -- Petr³ ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On 11/04/2014 10:30 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: On 11/03/2014 04:47 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote: Petr Viktorin wrote: Hello! There's been some interest in releasing pieces of FreeIPA's testing infrastructure so it can be reused in other projects. I will soon take the pytest-beakerlib plugin (currently in my patch 0672), and making a stand-alone project out of it. Later I'll extract the common pieces of the integration testing framework, and release that independently. Do we want projects projects like these to be hosted on Fedorahosted? That would be the 100% open-source solution. Or do we want to put it under a freeipa organization on Github, since we're more likely to get external contributors there? Why do you think it would get more contributors from github? Because yet another account isn't required, or the contributor process is perhaps better understood (via pull requests)? Both. The community is larger (i.e. contributors are likely to already have an account on Github), and the contribution process is nowadays more familiar to most people. +1, from my experience with the openstack community, and with redhat - see github.com/redhat-openstack, et. al. And I'm not talking about a proprietary process here: the pull request process is publish a Git repo, and nag people to merge from it. It's built into Git itself – see git-request-pull(1). Github makes this easy, and adds a Web UI and some inevitable (but optional) proprietary perks. But underneath it's still Git and e-mail if you care to use those. +1 Or both? (Would we want to officially mirror the project to Github from FH?) I'd be in favor of fedorahosted because you get a tracker and wiki as well, and having the repo there would round things out. Yeah, the tracker is a reason for FH. Github does host git-backed wikis using an open-source backend, but it doesn't have an acceptable bug tracker. What's wrong with the github issue tracker? ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On 11/04/2014 11:50 AM, Rich Megginson wrote: On 11/04/2014 10:30 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: On 11/03/2014 04:47 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote: [...] Or both? (Would we want to officially mirror the project to Github from FH?) I'd be in favor of fedorahosted because you get a tracker and wiki as well, and having the repo there would round things out. Yeah, the tracker is a reason for FH. Github does host git-backed wikis using an open-source backend, but it doesn't have an acceptable bug tracker. What's wrong with the github issue tracker? It's stored in a closed format and hosted on a proprietary service; if Github goes down or goes evil we lose the issues. -- Petr³ ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On 11/04/2014 12:00 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: On 11/04/2014 11:50 AM, Rich Megginson wrote: On 11/04/2014 10:30 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: On 11/03/2014 04:47 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote: [...] Or both? (Would we want to officially mirror the project to Github from FH?) I'd be in favor of fedorahosted because you get a tracker and wiki as well, and having the repo there would round things out. Yeah, the tracker is a reason for FH. Github does host git-backed wikis using an open-source backend, but it doesn't have an acceptable bug tracker. What's wrong with the github issue tracker? It's stored in a closed format and hosted on a proprietary service; if Github goes down or goes evil we lose the issues. Ah, ok. That does tilt things in favor of using fedorahosted for trac. I believe we can configure fedorahosted trac to use a different git repo (github) than git.fedorahosted. ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
Re: [Freeipa-devel] Releasing testing tools as standalone projects
On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 16:07:20 +0100 Petr Viktorin pvikt...@redhat.com wrote: Hello! There's been some interest in releasing pieces of FreeIPA's testing infrastructure so it can be reused in other projects. I will soon take the pytest-beakerlib plugin (currently in my patch 0672), and making a stand-alone project out of it. Later I'll extract the common pieces of the integration testign framework, and release that independently. Do we want projects projects like these to be hosted on Fedorahosted? That would be the 100% open-source solution. Or do we want to put it under a freeipa organization on Github, since we're more likely to get external contributors there? Or both? (Would we want to officially mirror the project to Github from FH?) I'm asking about the projects' home, the Git repo can of course be mirrored anywhere. The release and issues stuff on github is ridiculous, I have no opposition to mirror on github and get pull requests from there, but the home (ie where official tarballs are released) should be elsewhere also trac, although perhaps not so fancy looking is much better than github issue tracker imo. The only nice thing about github's issues is that you can answer via email, too bad it mangles addresses so that it is super easy to just send any reply in a black hole (done that on several occasions and was wondering why the reporter did not reply). Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York ___ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
