Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Review tests in microdnf directory #1579

Merged
merged 26 commits into from
Nov 7, 2024

Conversation

kontura
Copy link
Contributor

@kontura kontura commented Oct 23, 2024

A lot of the tests are duplicate to regular dnf5 tests but they are run through the microdnf command.

@pkratoch
Copy link
Contributor

Is it really worth it to keep the microdnf tests in the separate microdnf directory if it's just an alias for the dnf5 command? In past, we had run tests explicitly with "dnf", "dnf-3" and "yum", maybe it was even possible to switch the command for all the tests, I am not sure exactly. But having the test at one place and only switching the command name seems better than to have a somewhat duplicate sets of tests. I can imagine it might be a lot of work to change it, but it would be more maintainable later.

Most of them are duplicate to install-xml-base.feature
They are mostly present in reinstall.feature and
reinstall-reason.feature
Also drops one duplicate basic config tests
Also removes one duplicate tag in original.
Also updates the existing makecache test and annotates it.
They have basically the same functinality as the current dnf
module-reset but they are more structured and use appropriate steps.
One duplicate test is removed and the feature is specialized to
multiline config.
Also one test moved to dnf and one dnf test updated
@kontura
Copy link
Contributor Author

kontura commented Nov 6, 2024

I have update the PR to de-duplicate and merge the microdnf tests.
I really like this approach much better, great idea. 👍

@pkratoch pkratoch self-assigned this Nov 6, 2024
@pkratoch pkratoch merged commit c024caf into rpm-software-management:main Nov 7, 2024
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants