I'll totally help sort this stuff. -A
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Andrew Bayer <[email protected]> wrote: > As Tom mentioned, it's not toooooo hard to specify the private key, but > it's still a bit annoying. > > And yeah, I'm still baffled by the test properties stuff. Redoing that to > be more like jclouds would be super sweet. > > A. > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Adrian Cole <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, team. > > > > There's 2 gripes I have about testing whirr, one of which a very > long-term > > gripe. Whirr has a lot of quality issues and we need to make it very > easy > > for folks to participate and sort them out. A big piece of this is how > we > > address integration testing. > > > > 1. whirr defaults to put a random ssh key on the host, which makes busy > > work for those attempting to troubleshoot issues, as they hunt the key > down > > etc. > > * I understand folks who want super secure things, but that should be > > an option, not the default. > > 2. getting a sensible set of parameters to integration tests are too > hard. > > TemplateBuilderStrategy hard codes values that are senseless in private > > clouds, and normal system properties are not capable of overriding tests. > > This makes more busy work, as annoying if not more than point 1. > > * We should rip out TemplateBuilderStrategy completely as it needs to > > die. > > * We should switch our test classes to take into account system > > properties under some prefix > > > > I would help more, if the process of testing wasn't as annoying as it is > > now. > > > > -A > > >
