-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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
Enhance API-Testing-Guidelines.md #203
Enhance API-Testing-Guidelines.md #203
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Pedro Díez García <pedro.diezgarcia@telefonica.com>
Proposal updated with comments and feedback after dedicated session on May 16th. - Tests coverage section moved to to the top, merging legacy section "Test Cases contribution for APIs". - Added distinction between basic and enhanced test plan, to be aligned with Release Management proposal. There is no proper definition of what is basic or enhanced, so I suggested some initial test. - Added explicitly that environment variables may be kept in a separated file. We should enhance this part with more details and a suggested template.
In the latter commit: Proposal updated with comments and feedback after dedicated session on May 16th.
Please review these changes. |
Co-authored-by: Rafal Artych <121048129+rartych@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Pedro Díez García <pedro.diezgarcia@telefonica.com>
Co-authored-by: Pedro Díez García <pedro.diezgarcia@telefonica.com>
Co-authored-by: Pedro Díez García <pedro.diezgarcia@telefonica.com>
Co-authored-by: Pedro Díez García <pedro.diezgarcia@telefonica.com>
Co-authored-by: Pedro Díez García <pedro.diezgarcia@telefonica.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some minor editorials to be reviewed
Fine at content level
LGTM in advance
Updated with latest comments
…om/jlurien/Commonalities into doc/enhancement-testing-guidelines
I think I have incorporated all suggestions and feedback, please double check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
@jlurien Except above 1 comment PR looks fine to us . |
Fix feature filenames examples
Final comments addressed. Thanks for the feedback and corrections. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
@jlurien Thanks for accommodating comments .LGTM now cc @akoshunyadi @shilpa-padgaonkar |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM thanks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
Enhances API testing guidelines with much more details and explanations. Initial version was too basic to assure consistent and coherent testing plans.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #158
Special notes for reviewers:
This is a first draft following proposal and initial feedback in #158.
Changelog input