Summary: Investigate and identify gaps in Podman's existing test suite to improve overall test coverage and prevent regressions.

Description:

A robust and comprehensive test suite is crucial for maintaining the quality, stability, and reliability of Podman as it continues to evolve with new features and refactorings. While Podman has an extensive test suite, it's essential to periodically review and identify potential gaps where current testing might be insufficient. Unidentified gaps can lead to regressions, unexpected behavior, and a slower development cycle due to increased manual testing or post-release bug fixes.

This spike is dedicated to a focused investigation into the current state of Podman's test coverage, aiming to pinpoint areas where new or improved tests are needed. The findings from this spike will inform future stories and tasks focused on enhancing the test suite.

Investigation Scope (Timebox: 2 Weeks):

Over a period of 2 weeks, the following areas will be investigated:

1. Current Test Analysis: Review existing unit, integration, and end-to-end (e2e) tests to understand their scope and identify modules or functionalities that appear to have limited test coverage.

1. Bug and Regression Analysis: Analyze a historical sample of bug reports and regressions to identify patterns where issues slipped through the existing test suite. This includes looking for areas where tests were either missing or insufficient.

1. Feature-to-Test Mapping: Review recently implemented features or significant changes and assess whether corresponding tests were added or adequately updated.

1. Critical Path and User Workflow Assessment: Identify core Podman functionalities and common user workflows (e.g., podman run, podman build, podman pull, podman network, rootless operations) and evaluate their test depth and breadth.

Methods to Identify Gaps:

The following methods are suggested to aid in identifying test suite gaps:

• Historical Bug/Regression Review: Categorize past bugs by the specific Podman component or feature they affected. For each, determine if a test was subsequently added to prevent recurrence. If not, this indicates a gap.

• Manual Test Case vs. Specification Review: Compare existing test cases against official Podman specifications, manpages, and feature design documents to ensure all intended behaviors are covered.

• Exploratory Testing Sessions: Conduct unscripted, ad-hoc testing sessions on various Podman functionalities, specifically trying to break the system or find edge cases not covered by automated tests. Document any issues found.

• Review of Unmerged/New Features: Examine pull requests for new features or significant changes to ensure that adequate test coverage is part of the proposed changes, and identify any that might have been merged with insufficient testing.

• User Feedback & Support Channels: Monitor common questions, issues, or unexpected behaviors reported by users on forums, GitHub issues, or support channels, as these often highlight areas where documentation or testing is lacking.

Expected Outcomes:

• A detailed report summarizing identified test suite gaps, categorized by Podman component or feature.

• A prioritized list of recommended areas for new test development or existing test enhancement.

• Suggestions for improving the overall test strategy or introducing new testing methodologies (e.g., fuzz testing, property-based testing) if deemed beneficial.

• Preliminary estimates (e.g., T-shirt size) for the effort required to address the most critical identified gaps.