Alex, we can do this (and I hope we'll do) after we fix
https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1567367
Regards,
Alex
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Alex Schultz wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Aleksandr Didenko
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Aleksandr Didenko
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks to Dima, we now have ROLE annotations in noop tests [0]. I've
> updated all the noop rspec tests that we currently have and added
> appropriate role annotation [1]. So after this patch is merged, we
Hi,
thanks to Dima, we now have ROLE annotations in noop tests [0]. I've
updated all the noop rspec tests that we currently have and added
appropriate role annotation [1]. So after this patch is merged, we no
longer need to put any new fixtures into dozens of rspec files in order to
enable it.
Hi folks,
we've merged all the changes related to fixtures update [0] and bugfix to
unblock noop tests [1]. So if you see -1 from fuel_noop_tests [2] in tests
not related to your patch, then please rebase.
Regards,
Alex
[0] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:update-fixtures-to-9.0
[1]
Hi Alex
+1 to your proposal - this is long-awaited change.
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Aleksandr Didenko
wrote:
> One more thing about spec to fixture mapping [0]. What if instead of:
>
> # RUN: (hiera1) (facts1)
>
> we'll use
>
> # RUN: (roles_array1) (facts1)
>
> ?
One more thing about spec to fixture mapping [0]. What if instead of:
# RUN: (hiera1) (facts1)
we'll use
# RUN: (roles_array1) (facts1)
?
We don't need to duplicate complicated task graph calculations to
understand which task to execute, because we don't care about tasks
ordering and
Hi.
As you may know, we're still using some very old astute.yaml fixtures
(v6.1) in our 'master' (v9.0) noop rspec tests [0]. Besides that, we have
problems with fixture-to-rspec mapping [1]. So we've started to work on
those problems [2].
So please be aware of upcoming changes in noop rspec