Skip to content

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

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

dboltovskyi
Copy link
Owner

Proposal for "ATF Script Runner"


Develop script runner with the following features:

- Ability to run single test script
Copy link

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'

- Ability to run single test script
- Ability to run batch of test scripts
- Ability to run test set
- Possibility to run scripts in parallel
Copy link

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.

Copy link
Owner Author

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.


## Potential downsides

Existing CI jobs needs to be reconfigured in order to use new script runner.
Copy link

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.

Copy link
Collaborator

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 :)


## Alternatives considered

Use one of the existing test runners, e.g. Python Nose, PyTest etc.
Copy link

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?

Copy link
Collaborator

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

Copy link
Owner Author

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.

## 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.)
Copy link

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.


## Introduction

Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks
Copy link
Collaborator

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? :)

Copy link
Collaborator

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

Copy link
Collaborator

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.

Copy link
Owner Author

@dboltovskyi dboltovskyi Nov 7, 2017

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
Copy link
Collaborator

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
Copy link
Collaborator

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?

Copy link
Collaborator

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.

Copy link
Owner Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.


- Ability to run single test script
- Ability to run batch of test scripts
- Ability to run test set
Copy link
Collaborator

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?

Copy link
Owner Author

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).

- Ability to run single test script
- Ability to run batch of test scripts
- Ability to run test set
- Possibility to run scripts in parallel
Copy link
Collaborator

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

- 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
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@dboltovskyi standart


## Impact on existing code

No impact on existing code is observed.
Copy link
Collaborator

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?

Copy link
Owner Author

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
Copy link
Collaborator

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.


## Introduction

Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@dboltovskyi thats-> that's


## Introduction

Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks
Copy link
Collaborator

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


## Introduction

Originally ATF was developed for SDL developers and thats why it lacks a few features of modern Test Frameworks
Copy link
Collaborator

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.


## Potential downsides

Existing CI jobs needs to be reconfigured in order to use new script runner.
Copy link
Collaborator

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 :)


## Alternatives considered

Use one of the existing test runners, e.g. Python Nose, PyTest etc.
Copy link
Collaborator

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

@dboltovskyi
Copy link
Owner Author

@Itileda @AByzhynar @AKalinich-Luxoft @aderiabin @dev-gh Please check new commit 852bb8e


## Introduction

ATF is a great tool for both developers and testers that help test any change in SDL.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@dboltovskyi

  • 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)
Copy link

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?

Copy link
Owner Author

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)

@dboltovskyi dboltovskyi force-pushed the atf_script_runner branch 2 times, most recently from 2682667 to 5170bb8 Compare December 12, 2017 10:34
dboltovskyi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2020
* 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
dboltovskyi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2020
…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
dboltovskyi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2020
* Revision fixes

fixing typos

Updates after review #1

Update 0206-remote_atf_testing.md

Minor updates

Minor updates #2

minor text formatting

* Fixes after Laura review

* Update 0206-remote_atf_testing.md

* Update 0206-remote_atf_testing.md

* Update 0206-remote_atf_testing.md
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants