[Fwd: Run through of aeolus cucumber tests]

Mo Morsi mmorsi at redhat.com
Wed May 16 10:12:02 UTC 2012


On 05/15/2012 10:27 PM, Matt Wagner wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> Some replies inline below:
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:07:05PM -0400, Dave Johnson wrote:
>> So QE is looking into getting in on the existing cucumber action if it
>> makes sense but first we have some questions that we would like to work
>> through with dev.  Any assistance is appreciated.
> Overall, I think I'm of two minds about this. I certainly think working
> together on this is probably a good idea. I imagine it would save you
> guys some time, and we could probably use some help with some tests.
>
> At the same time, Cucumber tests are somewhat a developer's toolset.
> It's important that developers write them as they go. (Although
> admittedly, we don't always do a very good job of this, myself
> included.) I hardly mean to suggest that you're not allowed to touch
> them, just that I want to make sure that we don't fall into a trap of
> thinking we don't have to write tests because QE will do it for us.
>
> (Though our tests are really slow right now, so I'm not crazy about
> adding lots more without good reason.)

As Jay pointed out w/ his optimizations, this may be more a matter of
quality than quantity. We still can do more to speed up our spec and
cucumber suites and have allocated some time to look into what is
available to help us with this going forward.

Also FYI the cucumber suite isn't our only verification mechanism in the
app, we also ship rspec tests which align more with the traditional unit
/ functional / integration testing methodology. The cucumber tests align
more w/ the BDD testing approach where developers describe behavioural
stories which the application must satisfy.

Of course contributions to any of these would be more than welcome.


>>  - Would it be suitable for QE to submit additions directly into the src directories?
> My kind-of-rambling comments at the top of this email relate to this. I
> think the answer is that it might be valuable for you to send patches,
> with the caveat that our needs might not always align so you shouldn't
> take it personally if we don't accept some of them. I think it really
> depends on exactly what you're doing.
>

I'm sure we can work with any contributors to tailor patches to be
acceptable to meeting both our goals. Feel free to send any to the list
and we can work on them from there. If you need help with setting
anything up feel free to ask on #aeolus on freenode.



>>  - How is selenium used? 
> I don't believe we explicitly use it at all, but it may be an underlying
> dependency. I'm not the most qualified to comment on this one.

We had setup selenium a long time ago in the original oVirt and we can
still leverage the packages in Fedora to test our current rails app.
It's been tricky up to this point since the conductor web interface has
changed a few times, but it seems to have stabilized a bit recently and
we should be able to verify user interaction with this automated framework.

  -Mo




More information about the aeolus-devel mailing list