The beginning of this thread largely came from the fact that Marconi
clearly doing most of their QA not in an upstream way. To be integrated,
that needs to change.
Marconi has very good test coverage within the project.
These tests guarantee functionality at a project level (i.e the API works
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mar 26, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, at 9:01 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 21:02:58 -0700
Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
If an API is made and documented properly what domain expertise
would be needed to use it? The opposite is true for tempest and the
tests themselves. The tempest team focuses on just tests so they
know how to write
This is really interesting discussion but was thrown off by the different use
of ‘functional testing.’ I decided to reconcile it with my understanding and
ended up with this two-pager. Sharing it in case it helps:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, at 9:01 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
On 03/25/2014 04:49 AM, Maru Newby wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, at 9:01 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014
On Mar 26, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Maru Newby ma...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, at 9:01 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original
On Mar 26, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 03/25/2014 04:49 AM, Maru Newby wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, at 9:01 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal
On Mar 21, 2014, at 9:01 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:13 PM
'project specific functional
We are talking about different levels of testing,
1. Unit tests - which everybody agrees should be in the individual project
itself
2. System Tests - 'System' referring to ( limited to), all the components
that make up the project. These are also the functional tests for the
project.
3.
On 3/21/14 3:49 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober rochelle.gro...@huawei.com
wrote:
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
snip
We are talking about different levels of testing,
1. Unit tests - which everybody agrees should be in the individual
project
itself
2.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Malini Kamalambal
malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com wrote:
On 3/21/14 12:01 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal
I have an etherpad started to document QA requirements
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Tempest-Graduation-Criteria
I hope Sean and the rest of QA team can add their thoughts here.
I am also looking for inputs from the Sahara team, while the path to
graduation is still fresh in their minds.
We can
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:13 PM
'project specific functional testing' in the Marconi context is
treating
Marconi as a complete system,
On 3/21/14 12:01 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:13 PM
'project specific functional testing' in the
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
snip
We are talking about different levels of testing,
1. Unit tests - which everybody agrees should be in the individual
project
itself
2. System Tests - 'System' referring to ( limited to), all the
components
that make
Hello all,
I have been working on adding tests in Tempest for Marconi, for the last few
months.
While there are many amazing people to work with, the process has been more
difficult than I expected.
Couple of pain-points and suggestions to make the process easier for myself
future
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:35:15AM +, Malini Kamalambal wrote:
Hello all,
I have been working on adding tests in Tempest for Marconi, for the last few
months.
While there are many amazing people to work with, the process has been more
difficult than I expected.
Couple of
Thanks Matt for your response !! It has clarified some of the 'cloudy
areas' ;)
So having only looked at the Marconi ML thread and not the actual TC
meeting
minutes I might be missing the whole picture. But, from what I saw when I
looked
at both a marconi commit and a tempest commit is that
I will agree that the TC language is not as strong as it should be (and
really should be clarified, but I don't think that's going to happen
until the release is looking solid). Honestly, though, I think Sahara is
a good example here of the level of that we expect. They have actively
engaged with
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:13 PM
'project specific functional testing' in the Marconi context is
treating
Marconi as a complete system, making Marconi API calls verifying the
response -
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober
rochelle.gro...@huawei.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:13 PM
'project specific functional testing' in the Marconi context
22 matches
Mail list logo
