New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[LIBCLOUD-691] Add Onapp IaaS platform support #502

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: trunk
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@MatthiasWiesnerCC

MatthiasWiesnerCC commented Apr 9, 2015

@Kami

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kami

Kami Apr 11, 2015

Member

Great, thanks.

I will review it and add the comments inline.

Member

Kami commented Apr 11, 2015

Great, thanks.

I will review it and add the comments inline.

@Kami

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kami
Member

Kami commented May 3, 2015

@TooAngel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TooAngel

TooAngel May 28, 2015

Contributor

I took over the onapp integration on our side. I prefixed the non standard parameter with ex_. Also simplified the implementation to have less onapp specific classes and renamed the parameters which can be mapped to libcloud standard parameters.

Contributor

TooAngel commented May 28, 2015

I took over the onapp integration on our side. I prefixed the non standard parameter with ex_. Also simplified the implementation to have less onapp specific classes and renamed the parameters which can be mapped to libcloud standard parameters.

[LIBCLOUD-691] Add Onapp IaaS platform support
Implement missing support for Virtual Server in OnApp node driver,
as described in the OnApp API documentation:
https://docs.onapp.com/display/34API/Virtual+Servers
@TooAngel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TooAngel

TooAngel Jul 31, 2015

Contributor

@Kami bump^^ :-)

Contributor

TooAngel commented Jul 31, 2015

@Kami bump^^ :-)

@asfgit asfgit closed this in 592c934 Aug 1, 2015

@Kami

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Kami

Kami Aug 1, 2015

Member

Sorry for the delay.

The changes looked OK (except a weird test failure - see below), so I went ahead and merged it into trunk. Thanks.

There was a just a weird test failure which only happened on every Python version except 2.7.

FAIL: test_create_node (__main__.OnAppNodeTestCase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "libcloud/test/compute/test_onapp.py", line 67, in test_create_node
    self.assertEqual('onapp-new-fred', node.name)
AssertionError: 'onapp-new-fred' != <MagicMock name='mock.object.__getitem__().__getitem__()' id='139971643315264'>

It turned out the failure was related to using is to compare string values in the test (b3ca86b). The is operator compares the object pointers and not the values so it should only be used to check for values such as True and None.

The test passing on 2.7 was just a pure luck :)

Member

Kami commented Aug 1, 2015

Sorry for the delay.

The changes looked OK (except a weird test failure - see below), so I went ahead and merged it into trunk. Thanks.

There was a just a weird test failure which only happened on every Python version except 2.7.

FAIL: test_create_node (__main__.OnAppNodeTestCase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "libcloud/test/compute/test_onapp.py", line 67, in test_create_node
    self.assertEqual('onapp-new-fred', node.name)
AssertionError: 'onapp-new-fred' != <MagicMock name='mock.object.__getitem__().__getitem__()' id='139971643315264'>

It turned out the failure was related to using is to compare string values in the test (b3ca86b). The is operator compares the object pointers and not the values so it should only be used to check for values such as True and None.

The test passing on 2.7 was just a pure luck :)

class OnAppNodeTestCase(LibcloudTestCase):
def setUp(self):
def _request(*args, **kwargs):

This comment has been minimized.

@Kami

Kami Aug 2, 2015

Member

Also, just a quick heads up for the future - we have a framework in place for mocking HTTP responses (pretty much every driver tests use it).

So in the future, please use follow the approach other tests use.

@Kami

Kami Aug 2, 2015

Member

Also, just a quick heads up for the future - we have a framework in place for mocking HTTP responses (pretty much every driver tests use it).

So in the future, please use follow the approach other tests use.

@TooAngel TooAngel deleted the cloudControl:LIBCLOUD-691_onapp_support branch Aug 5, 2015

@TooAngel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@TooAngel

TooAngel Aug 5, 2015

Contributor

Thank you for merging.

I also changed the tests to the libcloud test framework (fec2964). Should I open a separate issue for that, send the pull request (#560), ...?

Contributor

TooAngel commented Aug 5, 2015

Thank you for merging.

I also changed the tests to the libcloud test framework (fec2964). Should I open a separate issue for that, send the pull request (#560), ...?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment