Merge "trivial: Fix typos in the test_removal documentation page"
diff --git a/doc/source/test_removal.rst b/doc/source/test_removal.rst
index ddae6e2..b22503b 100644
--- a/doc/source/test_removal.rst
+++ b/doc/source/test_removal.rst
@@ -1,21 +1,21 @@
Tempest Test Removal Procedure
==============================
-Historically tempest was the only way of doing functional testing and
-integration testing in OpenStack. This was mostly only an artifact of tempest
+Historically, Tempest was the only way of doing functional testing and
+integration testing in OpenStack. This was mostly only an artifact of Tempest
being the only proven pattern for doing this, not an artifact of a design
-decision. However, moving forward as functional testing is being spun up in
-each individual project we really only want tempest to be the integration test
-suite it was intended to be; testing the high level interactions between
-projects through REST API requests. In this model there are probably existing
-tests that aren't the best fit living in tempest. However, since tempest is
+decision. However, moving forward, as functional testing is being spun up in
+each individual project, we really only want Tempest to be the integration test
+suite it was intended to be: testing the high-level interactions between
+projects through REST API requests. In this model, there are probably existing
+tests that aren't the best fit living in Tempest. However, since Tempest is
largely still the only gating test suite in this space we can't carelessly rip
out everything from the tree. This document outlines the procedure which was
developed to ensure we minimize the risk for removing something of value from
-the tempest tree.
+the Tempest tree.
-This procedure might seem overly conservative and slow paced, but this is by
-design to try and ensure we don't remove something that is actually providing
+This procedure might seem overly conservative and slow-paced, but this is by
+design to try to ensure we don't remove something that is actually providing
value. Having potential duplication between testing is not a big deal
especially compared to the alternative of removing something which is actually
providing value and is actively catching bugs, or blocking incorrect patches
@@ -27,24 +27,24 @@
3 prong rule for removal
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-In the proposal etherpad we'll be looking for answers to 3 questions
+In the proposal etherpad we'll be looking for answers to 3 questions:
#. The tests proposed for removal must have equiv. coverage in a different
project's test suite (whether this is another gating test project, or an in
tree functional test suite). For API tests preferably the other project will
- have a similar source of friction in place to prevent breaking api changes
- so that we don't regress and let breaking api changes slip through the
+ have a similar source of friction in place to prevent breaking API changes
+ so that we don't regress and let breaking API changes slip through the
gate.
#. The test proposed for removal has a failure rate < 0.50% in the gate over
the past release (the value and interval will likely be adjusted in the
future)
.. _`prong #3`:
-#. There must not be an external user/consumer of tempest
+#. There must not be an external user/consumer of Tempest
that depends on the test proposed for removal
The answers to 1 and 2 are easy to verify. For 1 just provide a link to the new
-test location. If you are linking to the tempest removal patch please also put
+test location. If you are linking to the Tempest removal patch please also put
a Depends-On in the commit message for the commit which moved the test into
another repo.
@@ -91,32 +91,32 @@
#. paste the output table with numbers and the mysql command you ran to
generate it into the etherpad.
-Eventually a cli interface will be created to make that a bit more friendly.
+Eventually a CLI interface will be created to make that a bit more friendly.
Also a dashboard is in the works so we don't need to manually run the command.
The intent of the 2nd prong is to verify that moving the test into a project
-specific testing is preventing bugs (assuming the tempest tests were catching
-issues) from bubbling up a layer into tempest jobs. If we're seeing failure
+specific testing is preventing bugs (assuming the Tempest tests were catching
+issues) from bubbling up a layer into Tempest jobs. If we're seeing failure
rates above a certain threshold in the gate checks that means the functional
testing isn't really being effective in catching that bug (and therefore
-blocking it from landing) and having the testing run in tempest still has
+blocking it from landing) and having the testing run in Tempest still has
value.
However for the 3rd prong verification is a bit more subjective. The original
intent of this prong was mostly for refstack/defcore and also for things that
running on the stable branches. We don't want to remove any tests if that
-would break our api consistency checking between releases, or something that
-defcore/refstack is depending on being in tempest. It's worth pointing out
+would break our API consistency checking between releases, or something that
+defcore/refstack is depending on being in Tempest. It's worth pointing out
that if a test is used in defcore as part of interop testing then it will
-probably have continuing value being in tempest as part of the
+probably have continuing value being in Tempest as part of the
integration/integrated tests in general. This is one area where some overlap
-is expected between testing in projects and tempest, which is not a bad thing.
+is expected between testing in projects and Tempest, which is not a bad thing.
Discussing the 3rd prong
""""""""""""""""""""""""
There are 2 approaches to addressing the 3rd prong. Either it can be raised
-during a qa meeting during the tempest discussion. Please put it on the agenda
+during a qa meeting during the Tempest discussion. Please put it on the agenda
well ahead of the scheduled meeting. Since the meeting time will be well known
ahead of time anyone who depends on the tests will have ample time beforehand
to outline any concerns on the before the meeting. To give ample time for
@@ -133,17 +133,17 @@
Exceptions to this procedure
----------------------------
-For the most part all tempest test removals have to go through this procedure
+For the most part all Tempest test removals have to go through this procedure
there are a couple of exceptions though:
-#. The class of testing has been decided to be outside the scope of tempest.
+#. The class of testing has been decided to be outside the scope of Tempest.
#. A revert for a patch which added a broken test, or testing which didn't
actually run in the gate (basically any revert for something which
shouldn't have been added)
#. Tests that would become out of scope as a consequence of an API change,
as described in `API Compatibility`_.
Such tests cannot live in Tempest because of the branchless nature of
- Tempest. Such test must still honor `prong #3`_.
+ Tempest. Such tests must still honor `prong #3`_.
For the first exception type the only types of testing in tree which have been
declared out of scope at this point are:
@@ -160,8 +160,8 @@
Tempest Scope
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-Starting in the liberty cycle tempest has defined a set of projects which
-are defined as in scope for direct testing in tempest. As of today that list
+Starting in the liberty cycle Tempest, has defined a set of projects which
+are defined as in scope for direct testing in Tempest. As of today that list
is:
* Keystone
@@ -171,18 +171,18 @@
* Neutron
* Swift
-anything that lives in tempest which doesn't test one of these projects can be
+Anything that lives in Tempest which doesn't test one of these projects can be
removed assuming there is equivalent testing elsewhere. Preferably using the
`tempest plugin mechanism`_
-to maintain continuity after migrating the tests out of tempest.
+to maintain continuity after migrating the tests out of Tempest.
.. _tempest plugin mechanism: https://docs.openstack.org/tempest/latest/plugin.html
API Compatibility
"""""""""""""""""
-If an API introduces a non-discoverable, backward incompatible change, and
-such change is not backported to all versions supported by Tempest, tests for
+If an API introduces a non-discoverable, backward-incompatible change, and
+such a change is not backported to all versions supported by Tempest, tests for
that API cannot live in Tempest anymore.
This is because tests would not be able to know or control which API response
to expect, and thus would not be able to enforce a specific behavior.