[Fedora QA] #173: Obsoleting the tests for verifying http/nfs/ftp/hard disk install sources

[Fedora QA]

#173: Obsoleting the tests for verifying http/nfs/ftp/hard disk install sources
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  rhe          |       Owner:  rhe      
      Type:  enhancement  |      Status:  new      
  Priority:  major        |   Milestone:  Fedora 15
 Component:  Wiki         |     Version:           
Resolution:               |    Keywords:           
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment (by rhe):

 Replying to [comment:3 jlaska]:
 > I like your idea of creating/renaming tests to be ''Installation
 repository''.  In addition to that, some test rewording may be required.
 I think all the same installation sources are still supported, but the
 phrasing, and the procedure, has changed slightly.
 >
 > An attempt to identify the methods for testing the different
 ''Installation repository'' scenarios.  This doesn't include the
 ''Additional repository'' tests.  As you noted, those may need to be run
 also :(

 No worries, then they'll be included in ''Installation repository''.

 > {{{
 > #!html
 >
 > <table border="1">
 >   <tr>
 >     <th>Installation Repository
 >     <th>Boot media used
 >     <th>Default test scenario
 >     <th>Additional test variations
 >   </tr>
 >   <tr>
 >     <td>DVD
 >     <td>DVD.iso
 >     <td>Boot DVD with no additional arguments
 >     <td> <ul>
 >        <li>askmethod, and select CDROM/DVD
 >        <li>repo=cdrom
 >        <li>repo=cdrom:/dev/sr0 </ul>
 >   </tr>
 >   <tr>
 >     <td>Mirrorlist
 >     <td>netinst.iso or pxeboot
 >     <td>Boot netinst.iso with no additional arguments
 >     <td> &nbsp;
 >   </tr>
 >   <tr>
 >     <td>HTTP/FTP
 >     <td>netinst.iso, pxeboot or DVD
 >     <td>Boot netinst.iso with ''askmethod'', select URL
 >     <td> <ul>
 >        <li>repo=http://host/path
 >        <li>repo=https://host/path
 >        <li>proxy=[protocol://][username[:password]@]host[:port]
 >        </ul>
 >   </tr>
 >   <tr>
 >     <td>NFS
 >     <td>netinst.iso, pxeboot or DVD
 >     <td>Boot with ''askmethod'', select NFS
 >     <td> <ul>
 >        <li>repo=nfs:server:path
 >        </ul>
 >   </tr>
 >   <tr>
 >     <td>NFS ISO
 >     <td>netinst.iso, pxeboot or DVD
 >     <td>Boot with ''askmethod'', select NFS
 >     <td> <ul>
 >        <li>repo=nfs[:options]:server:path
 >        <li>repo=nfsiso[:options]:server:path
 >        </ul>
 >   </tr>
 >   <tr>
 >     <td>HD ISO
 >     <td>netinst.iso, pxeboot or DVD
 >     <td>Boot with ''askmethod'', select ''Hard drive''
 >     <td> <ul>
 >        <li>repo=hd:device:/path
 >        <li>repo=hd:LABEL=:/path
 >        <li>repo=hd:UUID=:/path
 >        </ul>
 >   </tr>
 > </table>
 >
 > }}}

 Wow, I'm impressed by your table format here, which inspired me to learn
 trac syntax.:)

 > What do you think about the idea of including additional variations
 inside a test case.  My thought here is that the test could still pass
 using the default test scenario, but would result in a warning if any of
 the optional test variations fail.  Is this confusing, should we just
 create distinct test cases for each of the optional test variations?  I
 was hoping to avoid that, but not if it's too confusing.

 It also depends on our test coverage IMO. First, the default test scenario
 must be covered in every run. For the additional test variations, should
 all of them or at least one of them be tested for each source? if the
 latter case, I prefer to write all Additional variations of each source in
 one case, then each source has two tests(except graphical): default one,
 and anyone from the variations. How do you think?

 > > Can you clarify this? do you mean ftp can be a option in http test
 cases?
 >
 > Yeah, since pycurl is used now for HTTP and FTP, I'm wondering if we
 need to explicitly call out FTP in our tests.  Should we leave that as a
 variation?

 Yeah, since ftp is still a use case, we can leave that as a variation of
 HTTP/FTP source.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/173#comment:4>
Fedora QA <http://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa>
Fedora Quality Assurance