Difference between revisions of "Meetings/TroveMeeting"
< Meetings
m |
m (→Weekly Trove Team Meeting) |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
* [vgnbkr] Exceptions in Unit Tests | * [vgnbkr] Exceptions in Unit Tests | ||
** Propose that when unit tests test for generic errors such as RuntimeError, we check with assertRaisesWithRegexp to check the actual error message rather than just the type. Propose this for all changes going forward, but not fixing existing tests at this time. | ** Propose that when unit tests test for generic errors such as RuntimeError, we check with assertRaisesWithRegexp to check the actual error message rather than just the type. Propose this for all changes going forward, but not fixing existing tests at this time. | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
<br/> | <br/> | ||
Revision as of 16:49, 8 April 2015
Weekly Trove Team Meeting
We have weekly team meetings on Wednesdays at 18:00 UTC in #openstack-meeting-alt
Want to add an agenda item? Please append your item to the upcoming weekly agenda while keeping in mind:
Guidelines for Writing Clear Agenda Items
An agenda item should have a clearly defined objective.
- [owner/author/interested-party] Good: Review #xxxxx has comments on foobar.py from multiple folks and there seems to be a lack of consensus on how to solve problem ‘y’. Let’s quickly rehash the merits of both approaches in 2-5 minutes and call for a vote. Goal: choose an approach and move forward on implementation.
- Bad: Discuss blueprint ‘xyz’
- Bad: Revisit blueprint ‘abc’ that we talked about last week to get answers on remaining disagreements.
When referring to previous conversations or competing viewpoints, be sure to summarize them.
Please make sure to include your own name in the first line of the agenda item, or the name of the person who will be presenting the subject/leading the discussion.
Trove Meeting, April 8, 2015
- [SlickNik] Trove pulse update:
- [vgnbkr] Exceptions in Unit Tests
- Propose that when unit tests test for generic errors such as RuntimeError, we check with assertRaisesWithRegexp to check the actual error message rather than just the type. Propose this for all changes going forward, but not fixing existing tests at this time.
