On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 03:59:26PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 15:25:17 +0200, Erik Skultety wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:50:33AM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote: > > > It probably does not make sense to do tests using that toolkit any more. > > > > At first I thought so too, I even thought that there hasn't been any commits to > > the repo for a long time, it turned out I was wrong, there's still some work > > going on, so I don't think we should abandon it completely. The fact that I > > (and most probably you too - sorry, I just assumed your testing habits) don't > > use it for testing doesn't mean, we should discourage others from giving the > > framework a try, we're not mandating the usage so I don't see an issue with > > the. With that said, once we have a proper continuous integration running > > upstream, then I'd say we should start encouraging users to use the avocado > > framework instead. However, for the time being, it's a NACK from me, maybe Dan > > has a different feeling about this. > > Since the last non-maintenance commit for this section was in 2013, I > don't think that mentioning any particular project makes sense. Avocado > may become obsolete in another 5 years and I doubt that anybody will > bother to update this document for the new hip project's name. Everything will eventually become out-dated and by following that logic, the only documentation we'd be left with is the code - "Documentation done right". I disagree, since as I pointed out, we're not forcing anyone, we're merely mentioning that such a thing still exists. > > I'm also okay just dropping this and making any poor soul which will > follow that document to resolve any obsolete part by themselves. Yep, let them make the decision for themselves, it's more than likely that a thought of using it won't even cross their minds, fine by me. Erik -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
