>The problem with tests being broken out from the main repo is that we end up having a really hard time confirming that new features include appropriate tests. Plus, tests are tied to features, which are tied to the code. They should be versioned together.
I believe this makes more sense for unit tests though, where tests need to be there with the code and both go hand in hand with release. As mentioned earlier, keeping or separating automation code\tests with the main product will not make much of an impact as a whole. Regards, Santhosh ________________________________________ From: Chip Childers [chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 11:07 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Breaking out Marvin from CloudStack On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 05:55:14AM +0000, Santhosh Edukulla wrote: > I believe both can exist independently. The framework should have more > flexibility and facilitation to run features\test cases based upon a given > release and version on a given test bed. It should be intelligent enough to > run those cases and only those cases pertaining to that release with few > config variables. Keeping aside branch\repo terminology, for me all marvin > both framework and tests should be at one place and separate from main > product code. The problem with tests being broken out from the main repo is that we end up having a really hard time confirming that new features include appropriate tests. Plus, tests are tied to features, which are tied to the code. They should be versioned together. As you said though, the framework is the framework... that's a tool. Frankly, with auto-discovery going forward, Marvin becomes no different from any other testing framework software that has to be installed to do useful things with the code in the main repo. Ex: maven! -chip
