Open Stack

On 11/28/2013 05:13 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
<snip>
> NB, technically we should have separate CI running for each hypervisor
> that libvirt is able to talk to, so there'd likely want to be dedicated
> CI infrastructure for the libvirt+bhyve combination regardless, perhaps
> it would need less overall though.

Ideally, yes. However I think it's completely fair to have in tree Class
C hypervisors which don't have separate CI if they are behind the
libvirt interface, which is highly tested in tree. That's my opinion
only, so don't take it as project level guidance. However, if we are
really telling folks to do the right thing and go through libvirt
instead of building new Nova drivers because it reduces the nova
maintenance burden, there should be incentive for doing so, like getting
the really minimal nova changes in tree to just config their libvirt
endpoints correctly without having to stand up the whole CI path.

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131128/b64371be/attachment.pgp>