cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From prasanna <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] All checkins must include unit testing
Date Sat, 10 Nov 2012 14:42:48 GMT
I like the idea of unittests with every commit.

A few related topics I have that might be worth considering in this discussion:

1) What about unittests for the existing code? Or do we fill that gap slowly?
2) Minor but we should probably update the unittesting wiki on how to
mock our managers, daos etc?

And a few things I'm confused about:

1) Gerrit is a code review tool just like reviewboard? So - would it
really serve the purpose if committers can still check-in without
2) Or do we enforce everyone to send in for gerrit review? That seems
counter-intuitive to the idea of committer-ship?

On 10 November 2012 18:59, Alex Huang <> wrote:
> While I understand what you are saying, I still think anyway we can get gerrit up and
running and just have people used to using it is a big plus.  The fact is we really don't
know what people are checking in right now.  If we actually have testing, I wouldn't be as
big on this.  It is precisely because we don't have testing that makes me want to make sure
we at least have a review system in place to catch problems.
> --Alex
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Nalley []
>> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 3:41 AM
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] All checkins must include unit testing
>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 2:04 AM, Rohit Yadav <> wrote:
>> > Can we ask ASF infra to setup gerrit, it that a possibility? If yes, that would
>> give us a lot more flexibility and quality control.
>> > Regards,
>> > Rohit
>> So I am going to don my ASF infra hat for a minute, despite having no
>> real authority within infra, but just another volunteer doing work
>> there.
>> I think it is important for us to recognize our place at the ASF and
>> the reality of infra at the ASF. We are a single project, and one that
>> is still incubating. The ASF has more than 100 top level projects, and
>> scores of incubating projects. Moreover ASF infra has scarce few
>> dedicated human resources to apply - and the rest is all volunteer.
>> The number of services they are already maintaining is sizeable, and
>> it is unlikely that they will be willing to take on the installation,
>> management, and availability of yet another service, especially when
>> the following is true:
>> * There is only a single project asking for the resource, and an
>> incubating one at that.
>> * It only works with git, which only a small fraction of projects at
>> the ASF use, and for which infra already has an impressive backlog of
>> tickets [1] the git backlog looks to represent almost 25% of the
>> unresolved infra tickets, and is more than double any other component
>> of ASF infra.
>> What you 'might' be able to do is request a VM from infra and setup
>> gerrit on it, and take on the responsibility of keeping it updated and
>> maintaining availability yourself (and with others you manage to
>> attract to help you). In my mind there is also the question of
>> opportunity cost - we still lack much from a testing perspective
>> (which would be an important prereq for gerrit to be really effective,
>> actually being able to run tests against the code proposed) so while I
>> really like the idea of gerrit we still have a good way to go before
>> we'd be ready.
>> [1]
>> uery=project+%3D+INFRA+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+AND+compo
>> nent+%3D+Git+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC&mode=hide

View raw message