HOWTO describe a test result » History » Version 1
Loïc Dachary, 03/26/2015 09:33 AM
| 1 | 1 | Loïc Dachary | h3. Format of teuthology analysis entries |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | |||
| 3 | For instance http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11153#rgw is structured like so: |
||
| 4 | |||
| 5 | * In chronological order |
||
| 6 | * The command line (that can be copy/pasted) used to run the suite |
||
| 7 | * A bullet point with the URL to the suite run in pulpito prefixed by |
||
| 8 | ** *running* if the run is not complete |
||
| 9 | ** *red* if the run has at least one error |
||
| 10 | ** *green* if the run has no error |
||
| 11 | * If the run has at least one error, the output of the fail formatter snippet (found at http://workbench.dachary.org/dachary/ceph-workbench/issues/2 is appened to it) is added and edited when the errors are analyzed |
||
| 12 | * When an error is analyzed, the link to the error is prefixed with |
||
| 13 | ** *environmental noise* if it must be run again because it failed for reasons unrelated to the test itself (DNS error etc.) |
||
| 14 | ** *known bug* and a URL to the bug (not just the number of the bug) |
||
| 15 | ** *new bug* and a URL to the newly created bug if it was discovered during the analysis of this error: it is likely to be a regression |