Skip to content
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

Make network_type optional #82

Merged

Conversation

atsaki
Copy link
Contributor

@atsaki atsaki commented May 24, 2015

This patch allows to omit network_type when Basic network is used.

network_type is only used to determine which option is used network_ids or security_group_ids.
It can be determine whether variables are nil or not.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 84.58% when pulling ea2bb10 on atsaki:optional_network_type into dfdf83a on schubergphilis:master.

@miguelaferreira
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @atsaki
I'm in the process of getting a virtualised cloudstack environment (i.e. cloudstack in cloudstack) and that will enable me to test against Basic networking zones. However, as of now I can only test against advanced networking zones. In order to get this PR in the release I'm preparing I will merge it without testing it myself. Later, I will come back to this.

BTW, manual testing is a drag and I've been exploring possibilities for having automated functional tests. I've seen something called vagrantspec but that seems rather immature. So I'm planning to just add a directory to the repo, and in there multiple subdirectories (one per test case). Then each test case would be a vagranfile that exercises a particular use scenario.
Please let me know if you have ideas/thoughts on this, I would very much appreciate it.

Cheers

miguelaferreira added a commit that referenced this pull request May 26, 2015
@miguelaferreira miguelaferreira merged commit 5a08459 into MissionCriticalCloud:master May 26, 2015
@atsaki
Copy link
Contributor Author

atsaki commented May 27, 2015

Hi @miguelaferreira

Thank you for merging.

BTW, manual testing is a drag and I've been exploring possibilities for having automated functional tests.

I completely agree with you. Although I haven't tested yet, I think CloudStack simulator and travis can be one option to have automated tests like https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack. It may be used to use test scenarios defined by vagrantfiles

@miguelaferreira
Copy link
Contributor

I also heard that from colleagues working on cloudstack. It seems there are some jenkins builds that run against the simulator, and we should definitely explore that.
(The simulator build is somewhere here, I think: http://jenkins.buildacloud.org)

Meanwhile, I'm working on a set of bats tests that simulate what we have been testing manually. These tests do need a cloudstack instance with at least two zones deployed (with Basic and Advanced networking) to run against.
The first draft is here: https://github.com/miguelaferreira/vagrant-cloudstack/tree/functional-tests-with-bats/functional-tests

I'll investigate the possibility of having a publicly available cloudstack environment to test against, but feel free to investigate the simulator angle, it would be great if we could get that up and running.

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.

3 participants