Make(file) juju tests and unit test easier to discover?

[Curtis Hovey-Canonical]

Hi Marco

On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Marco Ceppi <marco.ceppi at canonical.com> wrote:
> I've been toying with this idea for the past few days after seeing a
> Makefile in a charm. As we move closer to starting the audit on the charms
> in the charm store I'm trying to figure out best practices for the juju-test
> plugin to be able to run not only the integration tests but also unit tests
> that are starting to appear in more and more charms (LOVE THIS!)

...

> That way you could run the entire test suite, via `juju test`, or just the
> unit test with `juju test 01-unit-test`. However, I've noticed a lot more
> charms with Makefiles. I'd like to know if maybe utilizing existing
> conventions would be better. In this case `make test` would preform Unit
> Tests, if any, and `make functional` could run the juju-test functional
> tests.

+1 for codifying the communities conventions. I really like unit tests
in my charms.



-- 
Curtis Hovey
Canonical Cloud Development and Operations
http://launchpad.net/~sinzui