[Freeipa-devel] [TESTS][PATCH 0011] WebUI: Creating user without private group

[Pavel Vomacka]

On 03/31/2016 04:16 PM, Lenka Doudova wrote:
>
>
> On 03/31/2016 12:42 PM, Pavel Vomacka wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/18/2016 11:24 AM, Lenka Doudova wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/10/2016 06:58 PM, Petr Vobornik wrote:
>>>> On 03/08/2016 01:17 PM, Lenka Doudova wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/08/2016 12:59 PM, Petr Vobornik wrote:
>>>>>> On 03/07/2016 04:29 PM, Pavel Vomacka wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 02/25/2016 03:08 PM, Lenka Doudova wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> here's a patch for webUI tests that provides test for creating 
>>>>>>>> user
>>>>>>>> without private group.
>>>>>>>> Related to ticket https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4986
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since the option to specify GID when creating a user is not 
>>>>>>>> available
>>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5505 the test creates a 
>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>> posix group, makes it a default user group instead of 
>>>>>>>> 'ipausers' and
>>>>>>>> then attemps to create the user without private group. Returning
>>>>>>>> default user group value to 'ipausers' is provided even for 
>>>>>>>> cases when
>>>>>>>> the test fails so it would not block other tests from performing
>>>>>>>> properly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lenka
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ACK, works well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pavel^3 Vomacka
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NACK, don't use naked except, specify at least 'Exception'
>>>>>>   +        except:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, patch fixed according to Petr's review attached.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lenka
>>>>
>>>> Ticket 5505 was pushed. So the workaround can be removed. Do you 
>>>> prefer to do it in this patch?
>>>>
>>>> Also, maybe it would be good to test both cases and check if the 
>>>> error is actually the right one.
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> attaching patch fixed according to recently pushed changes.
>>>
>>> Lenka
>> Hi,
>>
>> NACK,
>>
>> 1) The data definition for user3 (user.DATA3) is not used anywhere. 
>> And the definition is actually the same as definition of user4. So, I 
>> think that it could be removed.
>>
>> 2) This is just a detail, but I would rather use 'combobox_input' or 
>> 'combobox_textbox' as parameter name because the parameter actually 
>> doesn't represent the value of combobox.
>>
>> Otherwise it works as expected.
>>
>> -- 
>> Pavel^3 Vomacka
>>
> Hi,
>
> thanks for comments, updated patch attached.
>
> Lenka
>
>
Thank you, ACK.

--
Pavel^3 Vomacka

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20160401/256199a8/attachment.htm>