On 01/15/2013 11:31 PM, Dan Callaghan wrote:
Excerpts from Nick Coghlan's message of 2013-01-16 11:11:05
+1000:
> - Retained explicit mention of Beah (now as a separate trailing
> paragraph), as I want to start down the path to supporting other test
> execution frameworks like STAF and autotest (as mentioned in Dan's
> email last year about defining a harness API). Actually making that
> happen is going to require that we draw a sharper distinction between
> Beaker-the-lab-management-tool and
> Beah-the-task-execution-environment, and the blurb is an easy place to
> start that process.
Not sure if I should start another thread about that, but what about
using autotest as an alternative harness to beah? I didn't follow the
discussion about defining a harness API (I'll read it during the
morning), but what I can remember is, we had some prototype
implementations, and people sent me patches, which I applied to autotest
to make both systems interact better.
I haven't heard much news after that. Is there anything we could do to
help to get the autotest client to play nice with beaker, so it can be
used as a harness?
Another subject that I find interesting is how we could make beaker more
useful for distros that are not based on rpm. In autotest we have some
strategies that make it run in more distros, such as debian based, and
we could figure out some solution for beaker.