LTP - Include upstart whitebox / blackbox testing API's?

[Scott James Remnant]

On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 05:26 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:

>       LTP has a number of whitebox and blackbox tests in place [3],
> most of the whitebox tests being C API's and the blackbox tests being
> shell invocations of Unix commands, as well as a well-defined set of
> test reporting API's and functions already in place.
>       So, my question is two-fold:
>       1. Would the upstart project be willing to work with LTP (via my
> team as a proxy in the beginning) to enter some unit test code and
> other test cases into LTP's test framework / overall testsuite, and
> improve acceptance in the Linux testing community?
>       2. Would either group be willing to work with my team to help
> maintain these testcases and develop new ones?
> 
I entirely support anybody who wishes to add more test cases for
Upstart, either to its code base (which already has an over-90% coverage
for its "white box" test suite) or to external projects.

It's not something I can honestly say I have additional time to devote
to; I'll continue to ensure all code in trunk and in releases is
submitted with near-100% test coverage (as per merge policy), however I
don't have time to help out with an additional test framework.

Obviously I'll provide whatever support I can to others who want to do
that work, including yourself.

Scott
-- 
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/upstart-devel/attachments/20080626/bbeae9b2/attachment.pgp