search

rsmp-nordic / rsmp_validator

Official RSMP Nordic automated test tool, build with Ruby and Rpec.
https://rsmp-nordic.github.io/rsmp_validator/
MIT License
4 stars 1 forks source link

Branch for running equipment tests? #251

Closed emiltin closed 1 year ago

emiltin commented 1 year ago

It's a bit annoying to see all our checks fail all the time, because equipment either fails some tests, or are offline. Very often, we're fixing things and running just the Gem TLC tests and the various docker and doc build actions is enough.

Maybe it would be better to run equipment tests (Swarco and Dynniq) only when pushing to a specific branch like equipment. Or we can run them only when we actually update the master branch, instead of on a PR.

Another possibility is to schedule them to run e.g. once per day.

otterdahl commented 1 year ago

I'm in favour of creating a specific branch for equipment tests. We have no ETA when they can be up and running again.

emiltin commented 1 year ago

Equipment tests now run when on pull requests against the branch equipemnt.

In addition, euqipment tests run daily at 3:45AM UTC (using the schedule trigger).

You can easily show badges in markdown, showing the latest status af workflows, eg:

Gem TLC Dynniq EC-2 Swarco ITC-2 Swarco ITC-3

You can show test run only against a specific branch. Ref: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/monitoring-and-troubleshooting-workflows/adding-a-workflow-status-badge. So maybe show only the results of tests run when you push to master.

Should we place them somewhere, e.g. on the RSMP website, or on the readme here on github?

emiltin commented 1 year ago

done

otterdahl commented 1 year ago

Should we place them somewhere, e.g. on the RSMP website, or on the readme here on github?

I think it is a great idea to place them on the RSMP website and on github too.

This is something I know people has been asking for for a long time. It is generally hard to know what equipment actually supports RSMP. Right now several manufacturers claim RSMP compatibility, but it hasn't been verified by us.

emiltin commented 1 year ago

OK, i'll start by placing them here in the github repo. Regarding the website, we might need a page dedicated to our test ghub and results?

otterdahl commented 1 year ago

yeah, that would be a good idea

emiltin commented 1 year ago

addedan initial page about compliance and our test hub: https://github.com/rsmp-nordic/rsmp_validator/actions/workflows/swarco_itc2.y