[
https://ovirt-jira.atlassian.net/browse/OVIRT-1788?page=com.atlassian.jir...
]
Barak Korren commented on OVIRT-1788:
-------------------------------------
Ok, I get the issue now - I think long term it would be easier to maintain our own
container images with specific browser versions then our own RPM packages. Its just a
little challenge to get the same caching behaviour we have for RPMs for containers.
I just discussed the details about how to go about thing this with [~gbenhaim(a)redhat.com]
and [~dbelenky(a)redhat.com], some small changes will be needed in OST and our CI cleanup
code to enable this, but its certainly doable.
Guys, please fill in the details of what we've discussed here.
new ui_sanity scenario for basic_suite -- need multiple firefoxes and
chromium
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: OVIRT-1788
URL:
https://ovirt-jira.atlassian.net/browse/OVIRT-1788
Project: oVirt - virtualization made easy
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: OST
Reporter: Greg Sheremeta
Assignee: infra
I'm writing a suite that does headless UI testing. One goal is to open headless
firefox and actually open the UI, perform a login, make sure things look good, make sure
there are no ui.log errors, etc. I'll also eventually add chromium, which can run
headless now too.
The suite requires several firefox versions to be installed on the test machine, along
with chromium. There are also some binary components required, geckodriver and
chromedriver. These are not packaged.
Ideally the browsers can be installed to /opt/firefox55, /opt/firefox56, /opt/chromium62,
etc. on the machine running the suite. So I think it makes sense to maintain a custom rpm
with all of this.
Where can this rpm live? What is a reliable way to do this? (I know we want to avoid
copr.)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100074)