[SSSD] More upstream CI tests

Pavel Reichl preichl at redhat.com
Wed Oct 7 08:28:43 UTC 2015



On 10/07/2015 10:23 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 08:58:32AM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (31/08/15 12:31), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 03:16:57PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>> On (19/08/15 23:38), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> as we're stabilizing the 1.13 branch and before we plan what we want to
>>>>> work on during the 1.14 development, we should use that time to write
>>>>> some more tests!
>>>>>
>>>>> Here are some areas where we could add tests. Please discuss or add your
>>>>> ideas, I would like to turn this list into tickets we can start
>>>>> implementing:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Extend the LDAP provider tests with more dynamic test cases.
>>>>>     - add a user to a group, run sss_cache, assert id user displays the
>>>>>       new group and getent group displays the new member
>>>>>     - conversely with removing users from groups
>> There are some tests on list, but still it wuld be good to se a test plan.
>>
>>>>> * Background refresh
>>>>>     - could be built atop the LDAP NSS tests as well. I think we have
>>>>>       all the infrastructure in place.
>>>>> * Local overrides integration test:
>>>>>     - this could be relatively easy, just call the overrides tool and
>>>>>       request the entry. Could be built atop the existing LDAP tests
>>>>>       or even use the local provider.
>>>> Firstly, we need to prepare test cases for this feature.
>>>> We can inspire in downstream ipa-views test case.
>>>> After review of test cases we can split it to several tickets.
>>>
>>> We already do:
>>>     https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2732
>>>
>>> It 'just' needs an assignee..
>> IMHo this should be a very low priority ticket. It's already tested by
>> downstream and they will have automated tests. We should focus to other parts
>> which cannot be easily tested (whithout greping log files or touching/checking
>>   internals in sysdb)
>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2697
>
> Yes, if Pavel didn't start on #2732 yet, then we can move it down, I
> agree PAM responder tests have bigger priority (also in Trac:
> major > minor), but..
>
>>
>> BTW if the tests were ready together with feature it would be something
>> different. It would not be a duplicated effort.
>>
>> If we really want to duplicate effort then it would be better to see/review
>> a test plan for local views.
>
> ..it's not completely useless though, we will refactor sssd_nss in 1.14,
> so we should have tests for views as well.
>
>> Transforming to pytest should be a trivial task.
>> Should I file a ticket?
>
> I'm not sure I understand? From the start I thought localviews tests
> would be in pytest, running tools and then getent..

Yes, that's how the test are. I'll send the first version on list today. I just need to resolve some final glitches.


More information about the sssd-devel mailing list