On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:12:06PM +0800, Shu Ming wrote:
> One more comment about the test package version.  Most likely, the
> package version will be the same version as the VDSM package
> version.  The rule we need to consider is: Should we keep the back
> compatibility with the VDSM files? Say allow newer version test
> package running on older VDSM files? Or just allow run the same
> version of test package and VDSM package.One more comment about the
> test package version.  Most likely, the package version will be the
> same version as the VDSM package version.  The rule we need to
> consider is: Should we keep the back compatibility with the VDSM
> files? Say allow newer version test package running on older VDSM
> files? Or just allow run the same version of test package and VDSM
> package.

Backwards-compatible tests is not a good idea in my opinion.  I would say that
the test rpm should require the exact same vdsm version.

> 
> On 2012-4-26 21:57, Adam Litke wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 05:24:29PM +0800, wenchao xia wrote:
> >>Hello,
> >>   vdsm now have UT suits for developer, but sometimes building and
> >>installation machine is not the same one, and additional check is need
> >>which is ignored at building time, so I think some test cases should be
> >>also run on target machine to check potential errors, Then I want to
> >>introduce a sub package as VT suits.
> >>Purpose:
> >>   UT: for developers, more likely a white box, running on building
> >>environment.
> >>   VT: for user and deployment, more likely a black box, running on
> >>  product or testing environment, all known issue should be covered.
> >>
> >>Supposed approach:
> >>   1 modify building system to generate package: vdsm-VT.rpm.
> >I would prefer the package name 'vdsm-test.rpm' and this package should 
> >include
> >unit tests and verification tests.
> >
> >>   2 install as an option, after install, user type "vdsm-VT" would make
> >>the test begin.
> >The test runner should be able to run the full suite of unit tests and
> >verification tests (with an option to run only unit tests or only 
> >verification
> >tests).  This can be the same program that we use in the build environment
> >except that it will set the PYTHONPATH differently to target the installed
> >files.
> >
> >>Planned details:
> >>   1 Going to place cases in vdsm project in ./tests/VT.
> >>   2 On installation will move some useful UT cases into VT.
> >If you follow my approach above, you would simply package the whole tests/
> >directory and no copying would be necessary.
> >
> >>   3 use same framework UT used.
> >>   4 two sub dir in test/VT: user_case_test;general_test.
> >What is the difference between these two types of tests?
> >
> >>   It is just a scratch from my mind, so I'd like hear your opinions.
> >Thanks for the idea!  Do you have a sample test for the verification test 
> >suite?
> >Will it be your pipe deadlock test?
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Shu Ming<shum...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> IBM China Systems and Technology Laboratory
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> vdsm-devel mailing list
> vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel

-- 
Adam Litke <a...@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

_______________________________________________
vdsm-devel mailing list
vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel

Reply via email to