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

Add a point where 'workflow' level metadata and settings could be injected into tmt #3538

Open
martinky82 opened this issue Feb 18, 2025 · 0 comments
Labels
status | discuss Needs more discussion before closing

Comments

@martinky82
Copy link

As a tester, I need to have a way to select and insert 'workflow' level metadata when scheduling a test job with tmt.

For example, there is a workflow where AVC check is required. As of now, that can be achieved via main.fmf in components' test root or via test plan. The problem is, that this piece of metadata certainly is not component-specific so the former approach is inappropriate (and I consider it harmful) and the latter approach is way too fragmented.

Simply put, when we want to introduce a new check in the workflow (or remove one from it), it should be doable via single action (as opposed to commiting to hundreds of test roots).

For me as a tester, it would be very useful to have a way to say '"I'm testing RHEL, I want AVC check and ABRT check and this or that setting" or "I'm testing RHEL in FIPS mode, I want FIPS enabled and AVC check" or "I'm testing distro abc and I don't want any checks but I want this or that setting."

The 'workflow' metadata or profile (however you want to call it) shall be selectable via cmdline (--profile/--workflow RHEL).

Questions to consider:

  1. metadata precedence: if there's a conflict between metadata from test, plan and commandline - what should prevail?
  • test metadata are the most specific and workflow metadata are the least
  • but cmdline expresses the user's explicit will and having it modified in the pipeline by something else leads to a great confision (where the hell did that come from?)
@psss psss added the status | discuss Needs more discussion before closing label Feb 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status | discuss Needs more discussion before closing
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants