On 01/03/2013 11:27 PM, Bill Peck wrote:
On 01/02/2013 07:40 PM, Dan Callaghan wrote:
> I think right now if the harness stops a task without recording any
> results then it will just become Completed/New, which might be
> reasonable if the harness doesn't want to say whether the task passed or
> failed. We could also introduce some new result distinct from New, such
> as None or Unspecified, if we wanted to make it more explicit.
I would prefer N/A (not applicable)
N/A sounds good to me, as it makes it clear this is a deliberate omission.
>> For navigation purposes, we may want to provide a way for
>> test harnesses/result servers to add an "external results URL" at the
>> job/recipe/task level (with the appropriate granularity being an open
> Yes I like this idea of allowing the harness to submit arbitrary URLs as
> results. On the Beaker side we could probably just treat that the same
> as a recipe-task log (or recipe-task-result log) but instead of being
> stored by Beaker it is just a reference to a URL.
This is a great idea.
Ah, URLs, the magic fairy dust of system integration tasks :)
Red Hat Infrastructure Engineering & Development, Brisbane
Python Applications Team Lead
Beaker Development Lead (http://beaker-project.org/
GlobalSync Development Lead (http://pulpdist.readthedocs.org