On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Greg Von Kuster <greg@bx.psu.edu> wrote:
I don't agree with this - the sample files should be used as guidance for the admin to create functionally correct .loc files. This is the same aopproach used for all Galaxy .sample files ( e.g., universe_wsgi.ini.sample <-> universe_wsgi.ini, etc )
Why then does the tool_conf.xml.sample file get used by the test framework then? This is a clear example of *.xml.sample being used in the test framework over the 'real' file *.xml.
I really don't understand this design choice - I would use tool_conf.xml (it lists the tools actually installed on our Galaxy, and therefore the things worth testing) while by default tool_conf.xml.sample includes a whole load of things where the binaries etc are missing and so the tests will fail (hiding potential real failures in the noise).
I'm not quite sure of the reason for htis as I didn't make this design choice - I'm sure "ancient Galaxy history" plays a role in this decision.
Probably ;)
Perhaps rather than overloading *.loc.sample with two roles (sample configuration/documentation and unit tests), we need to introduce *.loc.test for functional testing purposes?
I'm hoping we don''t have to go this route as we have so many priorities. If you would like this implemented though, please add a new Trello card and we'll consider it.
Filed: https://trello.com/c/P90b5Pa0/1165-functional-tests-need-separate-loc-files-...
That still leaves open the question of how best to install the test databases or files that the *.loc.test file would point at for running functional tests.
Yes!
I look forward to some more details from Dan on *.loc file setup. Thank you, Peter