You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In its simplest workflow, tmt is executed in a directory with tests, plans, and stories. That's fine. Then the test becomes a git repository, with a history of changes, and then tests become more complicated and start using beaker libraries, and then plans start referencing remote plans from other git repositories, and so on. Users interested in reproducible testing may (and do) ask a question of what plans and tests - exactly, please - were used in a given test run, and tmt should be more helpful by logging and exposing refs of various repositories it encounters.
The implementation may as simple as extending tmt.utils.git_clone() by adding git rev-parse HEAD & logging the output. It might be good enough to start with, but eventually, tmt could provide this info in a more structured way, e.g. via a dedicated YAML file.
In its simplest workflow, tmt is executed in a directory with tests, plans, and stories. That's fine. Then the test becomes a git repository, with a history of changes, and then tests become more complicated and start using beaker libraries, and then plans start referencing remote plans from other git repositories, and so on. Users interested in reproducible testing may (and do) ask a question of what plans and tests - exactly, please - were used in a given test run, and tmt should be more helpful by logging and exposing refs of various repositories it encounters.
The implementation may as simple as extending
tmt.utils.git_clone()
by addinggit rev-parse HEAD
& logging the output. It might be good enough to start with, but eventually, tmt could provide this info in a more structured way, e.g. via a dedicated YAML file.Related to https://issues.redhat.com/browse/TFT-3050
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: