never mind, I overlooked the documentation of possible arguments in the
comments at the beginning of the templates.
Joza
On 07/20/2010 09:13 AM, Josef Skladanka wrote:
On 07/15/2010 07:03 PM, Will Woods wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 07:17 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
>
>> == Proper solutions ==
>> 3. Pass all autoqa variables into the control file as a dictionary,
>> instead of a pile of variables. We have talked about this some time
>> ago. It will need a modification of all the test cases and some
>> tweaks in autoqa harness.
>
> Right. We might be able to cheat a little by changing the control files
> to pass the dict as keyword args, like so:
> -job.run_test('classname', name=name, config=autoqa_config, ...)
> +job.run_test('classname', **autoqa_args)
> If that works as expected, we can avoid having to change the test
> wrappers... but see below.
The only think I do not like on this approach is, that after this
change, I'll never know, which particular arguments are passed in
autoqa_args. Does not seem to be a big deal, but i kind of used it as a
reference of possible data i can work with inside the tests called by
the respective hook.
But i guess, that if this will be well documented in some other way,
then this is no problem at all.
J.
_______________________________________________
autoqa-devel mailing list
autoqa-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/autoqa-devel