openstack-qa-team team mailing list archive
-
openstack-qa-team team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #00087
Re: [Openstack] [QA] Aligning "smoke" / "acceptance" / "promotion" test efforts
So my first question is around this. So is the claim is that the client tools are the default interface for the applications? While that works for coders in python, what about people using other languages? Even then, there's no guarantee that the clients in different languages are implemented in the same way. Tempest was designed originally because while it does use an abstraction between the API and the tests, there is nothing to "assist" the user by retrying and the like. While I think there's a place for writing tests using the command line clients, to me that would be a smoke test of a client and not as much a smoke test of the API.
Daryl
On May 3, 2012, at 12:01 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
However, before this can happen, a number of improvements need to be made to Tempest. The issue with the "smoke tests" in Tempest is that they aren't really smoke tests. They do not use the default client tools (like novaclient, keystoneclient, etc) and are not annotated consistently.
Follow ups
References