From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6843DC433ED for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 12:44:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC8E2613CC for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 12:44:08 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EC8E2613CC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:46470 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lk4Vc-0000oR-19 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 08:44:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49970) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lk4UG-00005q-3l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 08:42:44 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:20966) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lk4UD-0003Tx-8Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 08:42:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1621600959; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=N7j8Em2K9BdP1hzxpGTjNb+/7SVGexm+ZKKntisRLj4=; b=BhJvj8356WsVH8nQ5hirUXm+f8wvzQCGo20rAwAdaV0gLnwBEv9guKxxJcWqTbUiccP7Hw jXZ4wiBkdWokB7sut2T/bnAqyCucfd8zMEspvh2S/+kx6gPDBK8NUSaonwNjZWXm7aMfeC ZXw6KviQtD9tmThqVtgiKkE01CCDY6o= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-204-uwNTN3WcNV20kTMYVtl_4g-1; Fri, 21 May 2021 08:42:38 -0400 X-MC-Unique: uwNTN3WcNV20kTMYVtl_4g-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CC19107ACE8; Fri, 21 May 2021 12:42:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from thuth.remote.csb (ovpn-112-113.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.113]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D10E45D9E3; Fri, 21 May 2021 12:42:27 +0000 (UTC) To: Willian Rampazzo References: <20210520195322.205691-1-willianr@redhat.com> <20210520195322.205691-2-willianr@redhat.com> <0f4a1c6c-ddba-ae57-2d55-f59c478dc9c5@redhat.com> <943fcdae-168a-adf8-c82b-b1a88369441c@redhat.com> From: Thomas Huth Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] acceptance tests: rename acceptance to system Message-ID: <82f5ed3f-3047-bfa3-c7b2-d91300f393f8@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 14:42:26 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=thuth@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=thuth@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -31 X-Spam_score: -3.2 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.374, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= , qemu-devel , Wainer dos Santos Moschetta , Niek Linnenbank , qemu-arm , Michael Rolnik , Cleber Rosa , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 21/05/2021 14.28, Willian Rampazzo wrote: > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 4:16 AM Thomas Huth wrote: [...] >> Alternatively, what about renaming the "acceptance" tests to "validation" >> instead? That word does not have a duplicated definition in the context of >> QEMU yet, so I think it would be less confusing. > > While at the beginning of your reply, I started thinking if > "validation" would cause less confusion for the QEMU project. Although > validation testing is a broader concept inside the Verification & > Validation process, encompassing unit testing, functional testing, > integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing, it may be > an option for the QEMU project. > > While system testing would be the correct terminology to use, if it > causes more confusion, using a less strict terminology, like > validation testing, is valid, in my opinion. Or we could come up with a new, artificial name instead (like "qtests"). It certainly need a "q" in the name. For example what about: - avoqado - valiqation - aqueptance - inteqration ? Thomas