This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Oliver Smith osmith at sysmocom.deDear Harald and ML, thank you for the feedback. I fully agree with your mail, and will create the missing tests for "subscriber create on demand" (and the related check IMEI code) soon. And for future features, try to write them first. Regards, Oliver On 5/24/19 11:36 AM, Harald Welte wrote: > Dear fellow Osmocom developers, > > I just would like to use this as a gentle reminder that we shouldn't be > merging new features without having automatic tests for them in place. > > What comes to my mind immediately right now (but I'm sure there are other > examples) is the "subscriber create on demand" feature. I couldn't find > any tests in HLR_Tests.ttcn about this feature. > > What this means is, that it will *eventually* break unnoticed, particularly > until somebody is using that feature and updating frequently to master, > which is unlikely to happen. Either you run a production system and then > you don't follow master, or you're just playing around and then that > feature is probably not something you'd be using in many cases. > > What actually bugs me most about it, is that the tests should have been > written first. For most of our development [1], the existing infrastructure > in terms of TTCN3 Modules is very strong, and adding related tests is > rather quick. This means it's *very* feasible to write the tests first > and then the actual code. In fact, my own experience shows that development > is much faster this way, as maual testing of the entire stack with phones > is sloooow. > > This is not to complain to Oliver or any single person, but just a general > reminder to all of us. That includes first and foremost myself as I'm > merging most of the development, but is addressed to all of the developers > and reviewers: IF something doesn't have a test, but could reasonably be > tested without spending a multitude of the development time on tests, we > should mandate that tests are available at the time of merge. > > We of course cannot mandate or enforce that developers write the tests first > and follow test-driven development methodology. But I would at least strongly > encourage everyone to try that. If you first spend tons of time with manual > testing and then write a test case, it's much less efficient as you spend time > for both. OTOTH, if you first invest the time into writing the test, then > the development can make very quick progress and you save a lot of time > that would otherwise be wasted with manual testing. > > Regards, > Harald > > [1] I'm referring to rather self-cntained, small features. For sure, > e.g. testing inter-MSC-HO requires lots of new tsting infrastructure to be > developed, as does testing of the PCU. So yes, there are exception. > -- - Oliver Smith <osmith at sysmocom.de> https://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Director: Harald Welte