Dne 04. 12. 18 v 16:40 Laurent Leuvrey napsal(a):
> Hello,
> 

Hello Laurent,

I'm sorry for such a late response, I wanted to double-check with the core-team 
first before answering. First heads-up would be, internally we meet on Monday 
and every release there is a public meeting where you can get immediate 
response (and get it recorded, see 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-RVZ_HFTbEztDM7wNY4NfA Another chance could 
be the avocado+qemu meeting every Tuesday 
https://www.redhat.com/archives/avocado-devel/2018-November/msg00018.html that 
is dedicated to avocado_qemu work, but I believe people will talk to you about 
regular Avocado issues as well.

>     Trying to gather information on what would be Avocado in the future, I 
> initially sent the below mail to the developpers mailing list as it was the 
> only way of contacting Avocado team I found in the doc. Then the email has 
> been returned. That's why I would take the liberty to directly reach you.
> 
>     Best regards,
> 
>             Laurent
> 
> -------- Message transféré --------
> Sujet :         Avocado future
> Date :  Tue, 4 Dec 2018 16:15:12 +0100
> De :    Laurent Leuvrey 
> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
> Pour :  [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> 

This is odd, don't know why it rejected you. Maybe try subscribing there first.

> 
> Hello,
> 
>     As I'm looking for a testing framework suite and Avocado is very 
> appealing regarding the functional test, its active development and quickly 
> evolving features. Then I went through documentation, forum and video to know 
> what will be Avocado's future, if its testing abilities will grow. And I 
> still got some questions regarding Avocado's evolution :

We definitely plan on improving Avocado, RFEs are warmly welcome as well as 
contributions. Lately we focused more on avocado+qemu, but we have other teams 
at RH using it for userspace/kernel testing and there are other companies using 
it for various testing as well.

> 
>     - is there a plan to support unit testing features through plugins for 
> tools such as xUnit tools (JUnit, CppUnit...)
> 

Integrating with different unit-testing tools should be fairly simple, we have 
glib/golang/python-unittest/robot loader plugins so adding new ones should be 
doable.

>     - will Avocado be able to use distributed computing (LSF, Cloud...) for 
> parallel testing jobs submission for instance
> 

I'm not aware of any plans to do distributed parallel testing as we usually use 
Avocado as the "man-in-the-middle" and Jenkins as the tool to decide where and 
how to run. Anyway you can split jobs and gather results as a collection of 
xunit/tap, but sure, a way to balance this would be nice. Again, RFE is a nice 
way to get feedback. (I know there is already EC2 plugin and somewhere I saw 
Azure plugin as well, but don't have real experience with these)

>     - currently, there are some wrappers for tools such as Valgrind. It 
> allows to instrument a test run. Will it be possible, thanks to Avocado 
> command line options, to ask Avocado to directly instrument the tested 
> command itself. For instance, you want to test the "sleep" command, then you 
> write a sleepTest.py "around" this command. For now Valgrind will estimate 
> the sleepTest.py memory usage but not the system sleep itself.
> 

I like these as well as providing detailed feedback on failed tests is as 
simple as re-running it with certain tools enabled. Not sure what you really 
want but I think wrappers work the way you want. When you write a test, 
whenever you use `avocado.utils.process` library to execute anything, that is 
the point where you can hook your wrapper/gdb. The simplest demonstration would 
be:

    avocado --show all run --external-runner /bin/sleep --wrapper 
"/bin/time:*sleep" -- 1

Which won't run the whole "ExternalRunnerTest" via `/bin/time`, but it will 
execute the ExternalRunnerTest, which uses `process.run` to execute the desired 
binary. Now the `--wrapper $script:binary` makes sure whenever `process.run` 
attempts to run matching binary ("*sleep" in this example) it uses the wrapper.

Now when you create a complex test with many `process.run` invocations, each of 
them will check for the binary and on match uses that wrapper/gdb. Btw gdb is 
even cooler than wrappers as it allows normal execution, reports stdout/stderr 
and everything and only on breakpoint you get a nice UI message how to connect 
to the gdb server. Very useful for thins that require many iterations to 
reproduce.

Best regards,
Lukáš

>     Best regards,
> 
>                 Laurent
> 
> 
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended 
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the 
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the 
> information in any medium. Thank you.
> 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to