-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Proposal for "ATF Script Runner" #2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
Develop script runner with the following features: | ||
|
||
- Ability to run single test script |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi
I think 'option' is more appropriate in that context than 'ability'
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
- Ability to run single test script | ||
- Ability to run batch of test scripts | ||
- Ability to run test set | ||
- Possibility to run scripts in parallel |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi
Is that really possilble w/o side effects? I mean if several test scripts will be run simultaneously and use same SDL instance they may have affect on each other. In case there will be several SDL instances again we may face with same problem due to connection parameters, communication channels simultaneous usage etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dev-gh Yep - with the same instance of SDL it's impossible. But the idea is to use SDL Watchdog (new feature in separate proposal) that will provide a new SDL instance for test script from the pull of available instances.
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Potential downsides | ||
|
||
Existing CI jobs needs to be reconfigured in order to use new script runner. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi
I think this is our local pain in the back and not something that committee should worry about.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dev-gh ,
not agree, we don't know who can use SDL and ATF and all other open source repos.
The change could affect not only us :)
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Alternatives considered | ||
|
||
Use one of the existing test runners, e.g. Python Nose, PyTest etc. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi
Than why we shouldn't do that? What are the advantages of yet another test runner?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi , suggest to keep silence about 3rd party if we dpon't want to adjust 3rd party of course.
as alternative, total refactoring of existing runner, but it will negotiate current big base of test artifacts
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dev-gh Using of test runner from Python seems can be more complex than implementation of our own. But this has to be investigated.
Anyway any existing runner can be adopted in scope of this proposal.
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
## Introduction | ||
|
||
Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks | ||
(Java jUnit, Python Nose, etc.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi
Not sure whether it is proper motivation since these are like general purpose frameworks whereas ATF is specifically tailored for SDL.
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Introduction | ||
|
||
Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi for SDL developers? Not for testers? :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi As I remember the original customer who requested ATF was testing team
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi ,
no matter for who ATF is, but I suggest to do not mention other modern framwork.
It could birth bad thoughts about usage of some other tool instead of ATF.
Please rephrase it in manner like - ATF is a great tool fpor booth developers and testers that help test any change in SDL.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AKalinich-Luxoft , @AByzhynar Actually I'm not aware about the history of ATF, but this particular phrase was provided by Alex Kutsan :)
Currently ATF is unable to: | ||
|
||
- run multiple test scripts | ||
- run test script in parallel |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi run test scripts in separate threads
|
||
- run multiple test scripts | ||
- run test script in parallel | ||
- create test reports in standard format |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi standart format
BTW what does it mean standart format? Do we have some standarts for that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi I think better to say "- create test reports with formats used in continuous integration systems" to avoid questions about standards.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
- Ability to run single test script | ||
- Ability to run batch of test scripts | ||
- Ability to run test set |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi what is a difference between batch of test scripts and test set?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AKalinich-Luxoft Test set means running of test script that are defined in particular text file.
Batch of test script means running scripts from defined folder (recursively).
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
- Ability to run single test script | ||
- Ability to run batch of test scripts | ||
- Ability to run test set | ||
- Possibility to run scripts in parallel |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi here also could be used "Ability" word as in other items
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
- Ability to run batch of test scripts | ||
- Ability to run test set | ||
- Possibility to run scripts in parallel | ||
- Ability to create reports in standard format with logs collected |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi standart
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Impact on existing code | ||
|
||
No impact on existing code is observed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi as I understand in terms of this proposal it is planned to improve test script runner so I think there will be impact at least on existing runner implementation. Isn't it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@AKalinich-Luxoft Existing runner (start.sh or run.sh) remains untouched
|
||
- run multiple test scripts | ||
- run test script in parallel | ||
- create test reports in standard format |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi I think better to say "- create test reports with formats used in continuous integration systems" to avoid questions about standards.
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Introduction | ||
|
||
Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi thats
-> that's
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Introduction | ||
|
||
Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi As I remember the original customer who requested ATF was testing team
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Introduction | ||
|
||
Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi ,
no matter for who ATF is, but I suggest to do not mention other modern framwork.
It could birth bad thoughts about usage of some other tool instead of ATF.
Please rephrase it in manner like - ATF is a great tool fpor booth developers and testers that help test any change in SDL.
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Potential downsides | ||
|
||
Existing CI jobs needs to be reconfigured in order to use new script runner. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dev-gh ,
not agree, we don't know who can use SDL and ATF and all other open source repos.
The change could affect not only us :)
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Alternatives considered | ||
|
||
Use one of the existing test runners, e.g. Python Nose, PyTest etc. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi , suggest to keep silence about 3rd party if we dpon't want to adjust 3rd party of course.
as alternative, total refactoring of existing runner, but it will negotiate current big base of test artifacts
39ad423
to
852bb8e
Compare
@Itileda @AByzhynar @AKalinich-Luxoft @aderiabin @dev-gh Please check new commit 852bb8e |
proposals/NNNN-atf-script-runner.md
Outdated
|
||
## Introduction | ||
|
||
ATF is a great tool for both developers and testers that help test any change in SDL. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- helps with SDL testing
- An option to run single test script | ||
- An option to run batch of test scripts | ||
- An option to run test set | ||
- Possibility to run test scripts in parallel (in separate threads) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dboltovskyi
My previous comment on the same point is still actual even if you'll run tasks in separate threads. How are you going to use SDL in that case so we can avoid concurrent usage of devices or SDL internal state changes due to multiple tests run?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dev-gh Maybe my comment was missed. Let me duplicate it here:
Yep - with the same instance of SDL it's impossible. But the idea is to use SDL Watchdog (new feature in separate proposal) that will provide a new SDL instance for test script from the pull of available instances.
So each test script from test set will be run within separate SDL instance of a certain type (e.g.: RC=ON, PROPRIETARY)
2682667
to
5170bb8
Compare
5170bb8
to
4dee3fc
Compare
* SendLocation for Mobile Nav This proposal is about extending the capability for apps to receive and service SendLocation requests from other apps which is currently limited to the Head Unit's embedded navigation system. * Updating links to assets * Updated links to assets * Create a * Asset #1 * asset #2 * Delete a * Delete SendLocationForMobileNav_RAI.jpg * Add files via upload * Delete SendLocationForMobileNav_RequestResponse.jpg * Add files via upload * Addressed comments
…vicelink#613) * Create NNNN-Avoid_custom_button_subscription_when_HMI_does_not_support.md * Changes after review * Changes after review #2 * Changes after review #3 * Update NNNN-Avoid_custom_button_subscription_when_HMI_does_not_support.md
Proposal for "ATF Script Runner"