After some conversations it was decided to not merge this branch to
master. The gist - since factories introduce complexity into the
library and a learning curve for test case writers it was felt this
would be a burden to manage and maintain this work.
I've left the branch as-is for anyone to pick
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 08:14:01AM +0530, Girish Shilamkar wrote:
> Hello Prasanna,
>
> +1 to the new marvin architecture.
> The proposed architecture will make marvin lot more stable, remove
> defining data in code and will be easier to add testcases.
Great! thanks for reviewing.
>
> Can we h
Hello Prasanna,
+1 to the new marvin architecture.
The proposed architecture will make marvin lot more stable, remove defining
data in code and will be easier to add testcases.
Can we have a run in jenkins.cloudstack.org to ensure that the existing tests
won't break with new marvin ?
How much
Edison - thanks for the review! I've answered inline.
(I've brought the technical review to the right thread from the one about
marvin's repo separation)
> Few questions:
> 1. About the "more object-oriented" CloudStack API python binding: Is the
> proposed api good enough?
As long as the cloud
Copying folks that this change will affect for review.
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 10:12:40PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> Once upon a time [1] I had propagated the idea of refactoring marvin to
> make test case writing simpler. At the time, there weren't enough
> people writing tests using marv
stien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 11:25 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [MERGE] marvin-refactor to master
On Oct 2, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:51:18PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
>> On Wed
On Oct 2, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:51:18PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 10:12:40PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
>>> I've also tried to disconnect marvin from depending on CloudStack's
>>> build and repo. This will hel
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:51:18PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 10:12:40PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > I've also tried to disconnect marvin from depending on CloudStack's
> > build and repo. This will help split marvin from CloudStack which I
> > will discuss in a
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 10:12:40PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> I've also tried to disconnect marvin from depending on CloudStack's
> build and repo. This will help split marvin from CloudStack which I
> will discuss in a seperate thread.
Should we just use this branch as the source for a ne
Once upon a time [1] I had propagated the idea of refactoring marvin to
make test case writing simpler. At the time, there weren't enough
people writing tests using marvin however. Now as focus on testing has
become much more important for the stability of our releases I would
like to bring back th
10 matches
Mail list logo
