As to the scenario refactor, the following patches need review, and in fact I
am waiting for the second patch to finish, because the change is a little big.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/519985/ Add extra_msg and server parameter to
check_vm_connectivity
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/49
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471352/ may be an example
Original Mail
Sender:
To:
Date: 2017/06/16 05:25
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][qa][glance] some recent tempest problems
On 06/15/2017 01:04 PM, Brian Rosmaita wrote:
> This isn't a glance-specific problem though we'
+1, thanks!
zhufl
Original Mail
Sender: ＜andrea.fritt...@gmail.com＞
To: ＜openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org＞
Date: 2017/05/25 21:19
Subject: [openstack-dev] [QA] Proposed changes to the team meeting time
Hello team,
our current QA team meeting schedule alternates between
Yea, the situation described below is imagable.
And all things seem to be a measure and tradeoff, i.e., if the feature is
supported by a big part of the backends and can be deemed as something like
"main trend", then we should test it in Tempest, though inevitably we will
suffer the procedu
The current mechanism of microversion looks a bit strange to me.
https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/c0223906280619b6eb1ffb3fa200136fd3050528/tempest/api/volume/v3/base.py#L49-L52
that means we set microversion at setUp and clear it at tearDown, but that is
strange,
1) we never set
To have only one folder (tempest/api/volume/ ) looks really good, and, do we
plan to deem "api_version" and "microversion" as one thing?
i.e., we will use the mechanism of microversion to skip v3 new functional tests
when the environment only supports v2?
Original Mail
Sender: ＜ghanshy
Thanks gmann,
I've uploaded a patch to move it, and fortunetly the testcase is not used in
defcore.
Original Mail
Sender: ＜ghanshyamm...@gmail.com＞
To: ＜openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org＞
Date: 2017/03/13 15:30
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [QA] Meeting Thursday Mar 9th at 9:00
hello qa team,
As to #1671256 test_get_volume_absolute_limits fails with no admin credentials
This testcase will fail when admin credenticals are not present, because it
uses force_tenant_isolation = True and is not in admin dirs(if it was, it would
be skipped instead of fail)
so, th
I think it a good solution, I already put +1 :)
And, as to the scenario testcases, shall we:
1) remove test steps/checks already coverd in API test
2) remove sequence test cases (such as test_server_sequence_suspend_resume),
othersize scenario will get fatter and fatter
Original Mail
First I really appreciate Jordan's work, and I always appreciate those who
really do something. If we don't have a begining, then we will never reach the
end.
I now sort out the problem as:
1) Do we need to refactory the Tempest scenario code? -- yes
2) What if scenario refactory will
Who can kindly send me a photo as an mail attachment? I am curious about it but
I can't open the link ^-^
Original Mail
Sender: ＜andrea.fritt...@gmail.com＞
To: ＜openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org＞
Date: 2017/02/22 11:40
Subject: [openstack-dev] [QA] [ptg] Team photo
Here are
Yes really nice and hard work:)
Though because of the reason of different time zone, I don't often have the
chance to talk with Kenichi, but I am impressed
by his working time, which is almost spreaded to 24 hours:)
http://stackalytics.com/report/users/oomichi
Original Mail
Sender: ＜
12 matches
Mail list logo
