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

[Martin Basti]

On 01.04.2016 14:34, Pavel Vomacka wrote:
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
Ticket is in closed milestone, this patch cannot be attached to closed 
milestone, please create a new ticket/or post the proper ticket.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20160404/daf5eade/attachment.htm>