Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

Hi, It's still not clear for me, why we can't just add Rally jobs with scenarios related to specific project. It will work quite fast and it will cover CLI (instantly) with good integration/functional testing. Best regards, Boris Pavlovic On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:52 AM, Sean Dague

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

On 03/02/2016 07:34 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > Sean, > > I've mentioned above, that current tempest job runs ~1429 tests and only > about 10 of them uses cinderclient. It tooks a lot of time without any > benefits for cinder, e.g.: tests like tempest.api.network.* verifies > Neutron, not

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

Sean, I've mentioned above, that current tempest job runs ~1429 tests and only about 10 of them uses cinderclient. It tooks a lot of time without any benefits for cinder, e.g.: tests like tempest.api.network.* verifies Neutron, not python-cinderclient. Regards, Ivan Kolodyazhny,

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

On 03/02/2016 06:58 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > Sean, > > In such case, can we configure which tests should be run for > the python-cinderclient src job? No, there really isn't a mechanism for this because getting it right is quite complicated and error prone. What is the motivation here?

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

Sean, In such case, can we configure which tests should be run for the python-cinderclient src job? Regards, Ivan Kolodyazhny, http://blog.e0ne.info/ On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 03/02/2016 05:24 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > > Sean, > > > > I do

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

On 03/02/2016 05:24 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > Sean, > > I do understand why we have tempest for python-cinderclient now. > > But my point is: tempest runs more than 200 tests per each cinderclient > change request which takes a lot of time. Why can't we just introduce > few integration

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

Luigi, >From my point of view, Tempest should verify Cinder for DefCore requirements [1] only. Such integration tests won't be just a re-implementation if a Tempest tests. It will me more extended set of tests for integration between cinderclient and other projects. [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

On Wednesday 02 of March 2016 12:24:57 Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > Sean, > > I do understand why we have tempest for python-cinderclient now. > > But my point is: tempest runs more than 200 tests per each cinderclient > change request which takes a lot of time. Why can't we just introduce few >

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

Sean, I do understand why we have tempest for python-cinderclient now. But my point is: tempest runs more than 200 tests per each cinderclient change request which takes a lot of time. Why can't we just introduce few integration tests which will tests nova<=>python-cinderclient API. Also, Nova

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

On 02/15/2016 02:48 PM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > Hi all, > > I'll talk mostly about python-cinderclient but the same question could > be related for other clients. > > Now, for python-cinderclient we've got to kinds for > functional/integrated jobs: > > 1) gate-cinderclient-dsvm-functional - a

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2016, at 11:48 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'll talk mostly about python-cinderclient but the same question could be > > related for other clients. > > > > Now, for

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][all] Integration python-*client tests on gates

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016, at 11:48 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: > Hi all, > > I'll talk mostly about python-cinderclient but the same question could be > related for other clients. > > Now, for python-cinderclient we've got to kinds for functional/integrated > jobs: > > 1)