Hi Christopher Zell,

just reassign me if the jenkins issues are fixed.

Cheers,
Sebastian

Also please update the README so other people can understand the setup without always asking you.

Review Hints:

• I think we should reuse the existing instance migration test suite
• delete the test-old-engine-instances project
• delete the jenkins job for the removed project from the jobdsl or ask Sebastian Menski to do it
• add a new module test-old-engine in the instance migration project after the test-fixture-76 module and before test-migration module, the test-fixture-76 already does the database upgrade to 7.6
• the new module test-old-engine uses the 7.5.x version of the engine to execute the tests and does no database operations, like upgrade, create or drop
• test instance for the old-engine are started int the test-fixture-75

Advantages:

• reusing of existing code infrastructure instead of coping it
• if upgrade scripts should be tested which introduce new columns with default values already existing instance from other tests can be reused without creating new test instances

I removed the job from the jobdsl: https://github.com/camunda-ci/jenkins-job-dsl-seed-jobs/commit/1bc0b886b0d6ab34148a6e26c8c5ebc5edd36dac

• Why did you choose rolling/scenarios instead of screnarios/rolling? https://github.com/camunda/camunda-bpm-platform/tree/master/qa/test-db-instance-migration/test-fixture-75/src/main/java/org/camunda/bpm/qa/upgrade
• Can you please adjust your test to use the instance migration infrastructure. Use ScenarioUnderTest, Origin and the UpgradeTestRule. Have a look at this examples:
  • Fixture: https://github.com/camunda/camunda-bpm-platform/blob/master/qa/test-db-instance-migration/test-fixture-73/src/main/java/org/camunda/bpm/qa/upgrade/scenarios/boundary/NonInterruptingBoundaryEventScenario.java
  • Test: https://github.com/camunda/camunda-bpm-platform/blob/master/qa/test-db-instance-migration/test-migration/src/test/java/org/camunda/bpm/qa/upgrade/scenarios730/boundary/NonInterruptingBoundaryEventScenarioTest.java

Hi Christopher Zell,

the reason I wanted you to align the test case was that you should use the upgrade test rule instead of queries by process definition key. In the migration test suite there can be multiple instances of a process definition so such queries are not the best approach.

If you instead use the upgrade test rule queries, which use an unique business key, these problems do not exist.

I adjusted the test case, see: https://github.com/camunda/camunda-bpm-platform/commit/f4bb3768535315e6d5957e8471e6155fc7bc78ea

Cheers,
Sebastian

Hey Sebastian Menski,

yeah you're right, it is much better.
Thanks for the changes!

Greets,
Chris