On 06/20/2016 08:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
Honestly, I feel like subclassing tests is almost always an
anti-pattern. It looks like you are saving code up front, but it
massively couples things in ways that become super hard to deal with in
the future.
Test code doesn't need to be normalized to
On 06/17/2016 04:16 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> I was reviewing this today:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326940/
>
> And I said to myself, 'self, do we really need to subclass the API
> samples functional tests for this microversion given this change doesn't
> modify the request/response
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
> Sent: 18 June 2016 05:16
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [nova] Question about redun
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016, at 04:16 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> I was reviewing this today:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326940/
>
> And I said to myself, 'self, do we really need to subclass the API
> samples functional tests for this microversion given this change doesn't
> modify the
I was reviewing this today:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/326940/
And I said to myself, 'self, do we really need to subclass the API
samples functional tests for this microversion given this change doesn't
modify the request/response body, it's only adding paging support?'.
