Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 21C87E5C1 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 02:20:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 27606 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2012 02:20:51 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27572 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2012 02:20:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27564 invoked by uid 99); 6 Dec 2012 02:20:51 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 02:20:51 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of Prasanna.Santhanam@citrix.com designates 203.166.19.134 as permitted sender) Received: from [203.166.19.134] (HELO SMTP.CITRIX.COM.AU) (203.166.19.134) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 02:20:45 +0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,226,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="13736694" Received: from banpmailmx02.citrite.net ([10.103.128.74]) by SYDPIPO01.CITRIX.COM.AU with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 06 Dec 2012 02:20:21 +0000 Received: from citrix.com (10.252.121.82) by BANPMAILMX02.citrite.net (10.103.128.74) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.279.1; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 07:50:20 +0530 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 18:20:18 -0800 From: Prasanna Santhanam To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org" Subject: Re: API refactoring work for 4.1.0 Message-ID: <20121206022018.GB20583@cloud.com> Mail-Followup-To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org" References: <0BCCCE152323764BB7FD6AE6D7A1D90601004B435B39@BANPMAILBOX01.citrite.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:15:11AM +0530, Andrew Bayer wrote: > Seems to me that coming up with a general API validation test suite (using > jclouds, Marvin, whatever) that verifies consistency of behavior across API > versions would be a very handy thing to have. > > A. My idea is to use marvin to build a basic test suite to validate that none of the API contracts are broken. I might be able to get to this work going next week. There's a lot of APIs to go through though so I'll be calling out for help on the lists. I'll publish the first set of tests so others can pick up after me. > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM, David Nalley wrote: > > > > > > > Please go through the api fs proposal. Suggestions, proposals, feedback, > > flames? > > > > > > > Sorry for not going through this earlier. > > The unit tests and testing in general concern me. > > So let me ask - what is the plan to test that the refactored API > > behaves the same as the current API? > > > > --David > > -- Prasanna.,