Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread Nicholas Skaggs
On 03/09/2016 05:08 PM, floccul...@gmx.co.uk wrote: On 09/03/16 21:56, Simon Quigley wrote: Flocculant, First of all, I would like to say thank you for providing input on this. There is no function implemented in the API to update the notice board (unless it is really REALLY subtle and I

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread flocculant
On 09/03/16 21:56, Simon Quigley wrote: Flocculant, First of all, I would like to say thank you for providing input on this. There is no function implemented in the API to update the notice board (unless it is really REALLY subtle and I can't see the function). I actually think Nicholas'

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread Simon Quigley
Flocculant, First of all, I would like to say thank you for providing input on this. There is no function implemented in the API to update the notice board (unless it is really REALLY subtle and I can't see the function). I actually think Nicholas' idea of having results on the tracker would

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread Nicholas Skaggs
On 03/09/2016 04:11 PM, floccul...@gmx.co.uk wrote: On 09/03/16 20:59, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: On 03/09/2016 03:51 PM, floccul...@gmx.co.uk wrote: On 09/03/16 20:43, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: Sure. Each of the test runs are a 1 to 1 copy of a manual test. So, in the same way you would add a

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread flocculant
On 09/03/16 20:59, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: On 03/09/2016 03:51 PM, floccul...@gmx.co.uk wrote: On 09/03/16 20:43, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: Sure. Each of the test runs are a 1 to 1 copy of a manual test. So, in the same way you would add a result, we'll have a bot account add a result with a Pass

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread Nicholas Skaggs
On 03/09/2016 03:51 PM, floccul...@gmx.co.uk wrote: On 09/03/16 20:43, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: Sure. Each of the test runs are a 1 to 1 copy of a manual test. So, in the same way you would add a result, we'll have a bot account add a result with a Pass or Fail to the daily image. It should also

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread flocculant
On 09/03/16 20:43, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: Sure. Each of the test runs are a 1 to 1 copy of a manual test. So, in the same way you would add a result, we'll have a bot account add a result with a Pass or Fail to the daily image. It should also leave a comment linking to the run so you can learn

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-09 Thread Nicholas Skaggs
Sure. Each of the test runs are a 1 to 1 copy of a manual test. So, in the same way you would add a result, we'll have a bot account add a result with a Pass or Fail to the daily image. It should also leave a comment linking to the run so you can learn more if you are curious. Simon has

Re: Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-04 Thread Istimsak Abdulbasir
Could you explain more how the tracker will be able to store test results for each daily test? On Mar 4, 2016 3:44 PM, "Nicholas Skaggs" wrote: > It's been an up and down cycle with mostly failing Autopilot tests for > Ubiquity automated testing. I wanted to

Automated Testing for Flavors -- Update

2016-03-04 Thread Nicholas Skaggs
It's been an up and down cycle with mostly failing Autopilot tests for Ubiquity automated testing. I wanted to re-iterate Max's status updates as to what's going on so people understand what will exist for help with testing the final images for Xenial. What's been happening: Max has been