Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60956)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ehabkost@redhat.com>) id 1gMYjN-0007pC-5o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 08:27:52 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ehabkost@redhat.com>) id 1gMYjL-0003tw-05
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Nov 2018 08:27:48 -0500
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 11:26:53 -0200
From: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20181113132653.GG12503@habkost.net>
References: <20181109221213.7310-1-crosa@redhat.com>
	<20181112104953.GB11580@linux.fritz.box>
	<f1c27ed2-9aba-edaf-2c49-ff565a0847ce@redhat.com>
	<20181112160025.GE11580@linux.fritz.box>
	<b51dd4e4-e814-db42-86be-698c0d87f8ef@redhat.com>
	<20181113121836.GC4830@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181113121836.GC4830@localhost.localdomain>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] Acceptance tests for qemu-img
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: Cleber Rosa <crosa@redhat.com>, qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta <wainersm@redhat.com>, Caio Carrara <ccarrara@redhat.com>, Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= <philmd@redhat.com>

On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 01:18:36PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
[...]
> Anyway, one specific concern about the "simple way" I have is that we're
> adding a hard dependency on an external package (Avocado) that isn't
> usually installed anyway on developer machines. Maintainers will of
> course just install it. But will this reduce the amount of tests that
> contributors run, and increase the amount of untested patches on the
> mailing list?
> 
> Maybe we can keep a simple in-tree runner like ./check that doesn't have
> any external dependencies and runs all of those tests that don't make
> use of Avocado utility functions etc.? And you'd use Avocado when you
> want to run all tests or use advanced test harness options.

What problems you are trying to address here, exactly?

If you don't have Avocado installed in your system, all you need
is Python 3, an internet connection, and the ability to type
"make check-acceptance" on your keyboard.

-- 
Eduardo