On Wed, 15 May 2013 19:43:17 -0400
Sande Gilda <sgilda(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 05/15/2013 06:43 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:08:50PM -0400, Sande Gilda wrote:
>> I think Pete considered scripts a requirement for testing. The pull
>> is based on this issue he created:
>>
https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart/issues/243
>
> testing by the user, or testing by us of the quickstarts?
>
I think by QA: Karel and team. Pete can correct me if I'm wrong.
This is an interesting point. We usually do not run cli per example, but per
whole testsuite. However, I we had CLI script example, we could isolate
examples better.
The question is, which testing model covers real world better, whether is it to
enable everything together from the beginning or whether to change
configuration in less intrusive manner. I'm slightly leaning towards the first
variant.
>> I consider them a requirement because some of the
configuration are
>> extensive and you need to not only configure the server, but remove
>> the configurations when testing is complete. Some requre more than 10
>> separate commands, and, not only do you get tired of copying and
>> pasting that many individual CLI commands, the process can be error
>> prone. With scripts, you can be assured the server will be configured
>> and restored correctly. :-)
>
> If they match the exact server version I reckon ? or are these cli
> scripts
> somewhat compatible ?
Well, the quickstart README file files list which versions of the server
they work with, so the scripts are expected to work with those versions. :-)
>
> /max
>
>> On 05/15/2013 11:23 AM, James R. Perkins wrote:
>>> As Sande said the new, unmerged, scripts aren't required. They're
just
>>> there for convenience instead of having to manually edit XML.
>>>
>>> Being able to run a CLI script on a server from the IDE would be pretty
>>> awesome. Do you guys use the CLI public API at all? If not that would
>>> work quite well for a feature like this.
>>>
>>> On 05/15/2013 03:26 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>> ...are these scripts *required* to run the examples the projects ?
>>>> Or are they just custom goals you can run as a one-off to change the
>>>> server or would they *always* be executed ?
>>>>
>>>> And i'm wondering if we should add a "Run on server"
feature in
>>>> eclipse to
>>>> run these easily from the IDE against a server already configured...
>>>>
>>>> /max
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:52:48AM -0700, James R. Perkins wrote:
>>>>> I started a conversion on a PR,
>>>>>
https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart/pull/500#issuecomment-17...,
>>>>>
>>>>> about creating a maven plugin to validate the CLI scripts in the
>>>>> Quickstarts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pete suggested this might be a good thing for Arquillian to
support.
>>>>> I did find and arquillian-maven plugin [1], but it looks like it
>>>>> hasn't been updated in a while. I'm also not sure if the ARQ
API can
>>>>> handle scripts. I don't mind helping update the plugin if that
seems
>>>>> like a viable solution. Also I don't mind adding support to the
>>>>> WildFly ARQ to allow for scripts.
>>>>>
>>>>> If anyone has any thoughts or opinions on this feel free to express
>>>>> them. I'm not sure if we even want to do the validation, but it
does
>>>>> seem it would be useful. Especially as quickstart targeted servers
>>>>> change.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]:
https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-maven
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> James R. Perkins
>>>>> JBoss by Red Hat
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jdf-dev mailing list
>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>
_______________________________________________
jdf-dev mailing list
jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev