* Michael Goldish <mgoldish@xxxxxxxxxx> [2009-10-28 10:43]: > > ----- "Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues" <lmr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > One thing that just occurred to me is, if we have a test config > > "library" as you said, it's perfectly possible to put the actual test > > set definitions and other config files inside the control file as > > strings. This way one can control configuration inside the control > > file, > > making it more convenient for usage, let's say, inside the autotest > > web > > interface. Since the control file would be reduced in size, the > > configuration snippets being in the control file would not be a huge > > problem, while keeping the original autotest philosophy of keeping > > stuff inside the control file... What do you think? > > Sounds great, except it won't allow you to debug your configuration > using kvm_config.py. So the question now is what's more important -- > the ability to debug or ease of use when running from the server. +1 debug When creating new test scenarios I make *heavy* use of kvm_config.py; I'd be lost without being able to debug test configuration files. -- Ryan Harper Software Engineer; Linux Technology Center IBM Corp., Austin, Tx ryanh@xxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
