Merge lp:~marcoceppi/charms/precise/seafile/tests into lp:charms/seafile
| Status: | Merged |
|---|---|
| Merged at revision: | 9 |
| Proposed branch: | lp:~marcoceppi/charms/precise/seafile/tests |
| Merge into: | lp:charms/seafile |
| Diff against target: |
68 lines (+58/-0) 2 files modified
tests/00-setup (+5/-0) tests/99-autogen (+53/-0) |
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~marcoceppi/charms/precise/seafile/tests |
| Related bugs: |
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Charles Butler (community) | Approve on 2015-02-10 | ||
| Juan L. Negron (community) | 2014-11-06 | Approve on 2015-01-08 | |
| Antonio Rosales (community) | community | Approve on 2015-01-08 | |
| Review Queue (community) | automated testing | Needs Fixing on 2014-12-09 | |
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Commit Message
Tests for charm
| Antonio Rosales (arosales) wrote : | # |
As this merge proposal only add charm tests and does not touch charm code I would like to suggest to accept this merge proposal even though the charm is failing the tests for the following reasons:
1. A test is still valid even if the results aren't positive.
2. Having charm tests provides the first step to helping the charm author and community fix the charm. Specifically by providing a reproducible failure.
3. The tests are seed (basic) tests that an interested person can build off of.
4. As fixes are made to this charm automating charm testing will be able to run additional tests in addition to charm proof.
5. Having basic tests, as demonstrated here, helps ensure the charm is in a working (deployable) state given this charm is a recommended charm. A test failure can prompt a bug the charm author can take action on. The charm author may not have been aware of the bug had the charm not had even basic deployment tests.
Thus, for the above reason I would suggest to accept this merge to add in tests.
+1 LGTM
| Juan L. Negron (negronjl) wrote : | # |
I agree with Antonio's reasoning for this.
+1 from me as well.
-Juan
| José Antonio Rey (jose) wrote : | # |
Bare in mind that if the queue follows its natural flow, the fix for seafile should arrive before the tests, so nothing to worry about here.
| Charles Butler (lazypower) wrote : | # |
Landing this with respect to Antonio's case made above, and our agenda with moving unkept charms to the ~unmaintained branch - this test serves as a baseline for that work and the activeness on the charm should keep it from moving abruptly.
Thank you for your attention to detail and hard work to ensure we have quality charms in the store.
+1

This items has failed automated testing! Results available here http:// reports. vapour. ws/charm- tests/charm- bundle- test-10624- results