Tuesday, 2022-05-10

*** soniya29 is now known as soniya29|ruck04:38
yasufumhi team.08:00
yasufum#startmeeting tacker08:01
opendevmeetMeeting started Tue May 10 08:01:44 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is yasufum. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.08:01
opendevmeetUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.08:01
opendevmeetThe meeting name has been set to 'tacker'08:01
yasufum#link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tacker-meeting08:02
yasufumWe have one item for discussion today.08:02
yasufum#topic About Improve V2 code's UT Coverage08:03
yasufumfrom caishuwen08:03
yasufumcaishuwen: Can you share your topic shortly?08:04
caishuwenI will start share my topic.08:04
caishuwenRegarding improving the ut code coverage of v2 discussed earlier at the vptg conference. We have discussions within our internal team. Below is our view.08:04
caishuwen1. First of all, the insufficiency of UT leads to a lot of rework of FT, so although the current tacker has no major functional problems, it is still necessary to improve the coverage of UT.08:05
caishuwen2. As discussed at the previous meeting, a large number of UT codes will increase maintenance costs, so currently UT tests will be performed only on the public methods in the v2 lifecycle. For example some common methods in utils. It is expected to cover the codes in the major lifecycles of instantiate, scale, heal, terminate, change-ext-conn, and change-vnf-pkg.08:06
caishuwenThe above two points are our team's opinions. Do you have any opinions? or any suggestions for UT?08:08
*** soniya29|ruck is now known as soniya29|ruck|lunch08:09
yasufumI'm still not sure how each of us can decide which function should be tested.08:10
yasufumDo we need to have some guidelines for that?08:10
caishuwenWe plan to make a table of which methods in which files are expected to be tested this time.08:12
caishuwenRegarding guidelines, I think there are a few points to consider.08:17
caishuwen 1. Common methods in all `utils` files should be tested.08:17
caishuwen 2. The processing of tacker mainly focuses on infra-driver, vnflcm_driver, and the methods in these files should also be tested.08:17
caishuwen3. And in V2, we added local_nfvo code, and the return of grant_response in this file also needs to be tested.08:19
yasufumWhat do you think everyone for the idea? Do you think it's enough for the purpose?08:20
yasufumcaishuwen: BTW, have you considered to change running UT in parallel?08:22
yasufumAlthough current tacker's UTs are not run in parallel for some reason.08:22
caishuwenThis is not currently being considered. Is it to shorten the overall UT time?08:24
yasufumAlthough it's not related to maintainance cost...08:25
caishuwenBut I noticed that some of our FT seems to be running in parallel.08:25
caishuwenI haven't done any research on whether UT can run in parallel, so I can do some research to see if I can shorten the overall UT time.08:26
yasufumyeah, FT is out of scope for parallelize.08:26
takahashi-tscSorry but I forget the previous discussion, but if so (caishuwen's consideration points 1-3 are covered), what is *not* covered?08:26
takahashi-tscI think 1-3 seems important, so I want to know what will not be covered.08:27
caishuwenI think some of the points that are not included are related to DB, and there are some common codes for each lifecycle in the controller. And some common methods in the conductor file are not included.and code to interact with external nfvo.08:31
takahashi-tscI see... hmm, they seem important a little. Do you think to cover them are diffucult to maintain? Or you just think they are low priority?08:34
caishuwenI just think they are low priority.08:37
takahashi-tscOK, so you think they shuold covered too, but current your plan is to cover 1-3 first, right?08:38
takahashi-tscOK. I agree with such strategy. But separately, we shoujd discuss priorities of all functions... Maybe such discussion will be based on your plan table, I think.08:44
takahashi-tscThis is my opinion, but I want to know other members' opinion.08:45
caishuwenYes, I will finish the table this week. We can discuss it at the next meeting.08:47
yasufumI think we don't need to be so strict about which one should be covered or not actually08:47
yasufumI agree to make some guidelines08:48
yasufumbut not so serious to keep the rule08:49
takahashi-tscyes, I don't think strict rules are needed. But without such list, it is difficult to decide rules even if it is rough rules. And, even if the rules are rough, the scope of discussion should be all functions.08:50
takahashi-tscI agree that final output of the discussion is guidelines.08:51
ueha+1, I think it's good to have a guideline because it will be a standard for other developers to create UTs from now on.08:54
yasufumseems no more comments on this topic.08:58
yasufumLet's continue to discuss based on draft table will be proposed by caishuwen later.09:00
yasufumcaishuwen: thanks for the progress!09:01
yasufumSo, wrap up this meeting if you have no more comment.09:02
yasufumThank you for joining, bye!09:03
uehathanks, bye09:03
opendevmeetMeeting ended Tue May 10 09:03:43 2022 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)09:03
opendevmeetMinutes:        https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tacker/2022/tacker.2022-05-10-08.01.html09:03
opendevmeetMinutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tacker/2022/tacker.2022-05-10-08.01.txt09:03
opendevmeetLog:            https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tacker/2022/tacker.2022-05-10-08.01.log.html09:03
*** soniya29|ruck|lunch is now known as soniya29|ruck09:21
*** soniya29|ruck is now known as soniya29|ruck|break11:58
*** soniya29|ruck|break is now known as soniya29|ruck12:27
*** dasm|off is now known as dasm13:31
*** soniya29|ruck is now known as soniya29|out15:20
*** dasm is now known as dasm|bbl17:27
julianpAhoy! Apologies. Was in a meeting.21:16

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!