[SERVER-35767] Organize upgrade-downgrade tests as generic or non-generic regarding feature compatibility version Created: 22/Jun/18 Updated: 06/Dec/22 |
|
| Status: | Backlog |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Upgrade/Downgrade |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Dewal Gupta | Assignee: | Backlog - Server Tooling and Methods (STM) (Inactive) |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | stm | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||
| Assigned Teams: |
Server Tooling & Methods
|
||||
| Participants: | |||||
| Description |
|
Enforce a requirement to allow developers to specify whether or not test that use FCV are generic (should be kept from release to release) or non-generic (version specific). |
| Comments |
| Comment by Steven Vannelli [ 10/May/22 ] |
|
Moving this ticket to the Backlog and removing the "Backlog" fixVersion as per our latest policy for using fixVersions. |
| Comment by Maria van Keulen [ 19/Dec/19 ] |
|
ian.whalen Sure. The benefit of this is to ease the Upgrade/Downgrade work of determining which tests are version-specific, and thus need to be removed in the following release, and which are generic, so should be kept. |
| Comment by Ian Whalen (Inactive) [ 19/Dec/19 ] |
|
maria.vankeulen as one of the people still on Server who might have context - can you help explain what the benefit is to doing this so we can figure out a priority in whether or not we do it? |
| Comment by Max Hirschhorn [ 29/Jun/18 ] |
|
ian.whalen, my understanding of this being on the Storage team's backlog is because this ticket relates to Dewal's intern project. |
| Comment by Ian Whalen (Inactive) [ 29/Jun/18 ] |
|
Putting on the TIG team to consider/prioritize for now because there isn't anything very Storage-specific about this. |
| Comment by Dewal Gupta [ 22/Jun/18 ] |
|
Based on a conversation with max.hirschhorn and maria.vankeulen, one possible solution would be to use ESLint to parse for uses of setFeatureCompatibilityVersion. Also, "generic" and "non-generic" tags could be added in resmoke andĀ ESLint could be used to detect the presence of (or lack thereof) these tags. |