Thanks Kevin, Just to wrap up this thread here, the work for this is being done in KNOX-651. There is some further discussion to be had in terms of potential dev process changes with respect to running of various test suite types. I’ll send a review request for this JIRA and we can discuss it there.
Sumit. On 1/18/16, 1:56 PM, "Kevin Minder" <kevin.min...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >This is awesome. > >As far as project structure I was wondering if a bit of a deeper tree >might be in order. I was thinking about this in particular because we >might want to have separate suites for individual components and our top >level module list is already to long. We might need individual per >component integration suites to keep the resource requirements in check. > >Could something like this be made to work? It really comes down to what >Maven might require. >./gateway-test-integ/webhdfs-kerb >./gateway-test-integ/webhdfs (possibly) >./gateway-test-integ/hbase-kerb (eventually) > >Also note that I sort of tried to start a test partitioning mechanism for >this already. >Check this out: >http://www.agile-engineering.net/2012/04/unit-and-integration-tests-with-m >aven.html > >And take a look here: >gateway-test-utils/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/test/category >Not sure if we should add a KerberosTests category. > >If we go that route we might need to go back and add @Category >annotations to tests that don’t have them. > >Right now the unit tests do this via the root pom.xml. > ><excludedGroups> > >org.apache.hadoop.test.category.SlowTests,org.apache.hadoop.test.category. >ManualTests,org.apache.hadoop.test.category.IntegrationTests > </excludedGroups> > > > > >On 1/18/16, 12:18 PM, "Sumit Gupta" <sumit.gu...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > >>Hi everyone, >> >>I took a stab at getting the pieces together for a very basic knox test. >>I >>put it up here for a preview https://github.com/sumitg/knox-minikdc-test. >>Please note that it will be cleaned up if we decide we want to put >>something like this in knox project. >> >>The way I understand Kevin¹s thoughts, I would add a maven module >>(something like Œgateway-test-secure¹ or Œgateway-test-integration¹?) and >>a maven profile that triggers the test suite run, so that we can have a >>separate job for this or run it locally by passing in the profile name. >> >>I will be happy to add a bunch of the webhdfs tests to start this off. I >>imagine we¹ll iterate over this over time and keep adding more support >>for >>various services and the associated tests for them. >> >>Sumit. >> >> >>On 1/5/16, 3:33 PM, "larry mccay" <larry.mc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>+1 on adding secure tests! >>> >>>What functionality do we want to test as part of this suite initially? >>> >>> >>>On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Kevin Minder >>><kevin.min...@hortonworks.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>>> Hey Everyone, >>>> I ran across this test in Hadoop the other day. >>>> >>>> >>>>https://github.com/apache/hadoop/blob/2f623fb8cc3dc49221216c3b46b6f5114 >>>>48 >>>>11904/hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/h >>>>df >>>>s/qjournal/TestSecureNNWithQJM.java >>>> I was thinking it could be the bases for a secure functional test. We >>>>are >>>> sorely missing those. My basic thought would be that this type of >>>>test >>>> would have a separate maven profile and would run as a separate >>>>jenkins >>>>job. >>>> Kevin. >>>> >> >>
