Damjan, Thanks for clarifying - I agree with you on vnet tests.
Hemant -----Original Message----- From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> On Behalf Of Damjan Marion via lists.fd.io Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 12:38 PM To: Dave Wallace <dwallac...@gmail.com> Cc: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] keeping tests outside of src/ > On 25.03.2021., at 21:14, Dave Wallace <dwallac...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Damjan, > > This initiative originated with the wider adoption of plugin development at > the request of Dave Barach to allow the development of plugins outside the > VPP repo. After completing the job for plugins, there were several requests > to extend that to all of the features. Presumably this was coupled with the > desire to migrate feature source code from vnet into the plugin arena, but I > don't recall all of the details of the discussion. OK, there are 2 different things. One is testing of out-of-tree plugins, another one is VPP tree layout. I fully agree that we need to support testing of out-of-tree plugins. Than can be fixed as simple as ‘make test TEST_DIR=/path/to/out-of-tree-plugin/test’. I don’t see how those two things relate. > > Unfortunately, this effort stalled across several releases due to lack of > cycles and I'm just now in the process of completing the job. > > I'm perfectly ok accepting a -2 for test code that maintainers prefer to > leave in .../vpp/test, but I don't see the original requirement to co-locate > plugin source & test code going away. So the majority of the feature source > & test code will remain structured that way and the end result will be > inconsistent at best. I’m not trying ot say we should -2, and I know that you submitted those patches believing that this is the right thing to do. I am just under impression that we are all not on the same page what is right thing to do. > > Personally, I think that it makes sense to continue to move features source, > test code, and documentation to be co-located in a modular and consistent > sub-tree structure. I also see value in migrating features out of vnet into > the plugin sub-tree. I disagree here, I believe it should stay separate. But this is just my opinion, I’m fine to be minority here, i just would like to know that we are all on the same page and that whatever we decide we decided with good understanding of implications. Implications may be: - licensing implications like the current saga with scapy - deciding if CMake should install test infra as part of vpp-dev packaging - dealing with tests which cover multiple source code components or infra Mechanical move of file is the easiest part. As currently src/ is currently one entity handled by CMake, throwing tests in without test infra being part of src/ looks to me very broken. > > For what its worth, the changes to test/Makefile gather all of the source as > soft links into the build tree (.../vpp/build-root/build-test/src), but I > understand that is not the same your original plan. > > Thanks, > -daw- > > On 3/25/2021 3:16 PM, Damjan Marion via lists.fd.io wrote: >> Hi, >> >> It may be that it is not discussed or i was just ignorant, but I noticed >> that there is ongoing activity to scatter tests all across the src/. >> When I started "make test" long long time ago i intentionally put it >> to separate tree following the pattern from other projects and to be honest >> it makes me more sense that all tests are contained in the separate tree. >> >> Are we sure that this test file scatter activity is right thing to do? >> Anyone aware of any other project doing the same? >> >> — >> Damjan >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#19040): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/19040 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/81611239/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
