[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Testsuite AMI Event Module - add ordered expectation lists to facilitate call ID testing

[jrose]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2056/#review6751
-----------------------------------------------------------



/asterisk/trunk/tests/cdr/console_fork_after_busy_forward/test-config.yaml
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2056/#comment12803>

    As of now, none of the changes in this file are going to be applied and this is strictly an example use. This aspect of the test would only work in trunk right now anyway.


- jrose


On July 18, 2012, 2:43 p.m., jrose wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2056/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 18, 2012, 2:43 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers, Mark Michelson and Matt Jordan.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> This patch adds a new type to the AMI Event Module which allows requirements to be specified in a list format which creates a list of ordered expectations for events. This is useful for testing Call ID stuff like in the example (modified console_fork_after_busy_forward)
> 
> The actual test included doesn't necessarily need to be included, and the primary purpose of this review is to examine the format and the changes to the AMI Event Module.
> 
> Also, some changes are made to fix some problems that were noticed during development like a missed include in the ForkCDRModule and a missed return in TestCase.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /asterisk/trunk/lib/python/asterisk/TestCase.py 3330 
>   /asterisk/trunk/lib/python/asterisk/ami.py 3330 
>   /asterisk/trunk/sample-yaml/ami-config.yaml.sample 3330 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/cdr/ForkCdrModule.py 3330 
>   /asterisk/trunk/tests/cdr/console_fork_after_busy_forward/test-config.yaml 3330 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2056/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Mostly I just tested different configurations in the included example test.  Events in the requirements not matching, nomatch conditions not being met properly, having too many events come in, not having enough events come in, differing allowable numbers of events (set via 'count') from the expected events set and stuff like that.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jrose
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20120719/d4f827a0/attachment.htm>