[openstack-dev] [ironic] Announcing Third Party CI for Proliant iLO Drivers

Anita Kuno anteaya at anteaya.info
Wed Dec 2 17:40:30 UTC 2015

On 12/02/2015 11:56 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 12:48:44PM -0500, Anita Kuno wrote:
>> On 11/30/2015 12:33 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
>>> I was there and I already said that I'm not buying into "spamming the
>>> list" argument. There are much less important things that I see here
>>> right now, even though I do actively use filters to only see potentially
>>> relevant things. We've been actively (and not very successfully)
>>> encouraging people to use ML instead of IRC conversations (or even
>>> private messages and video chats), and this thread does not seem in line
>>> with it.
>> Please discuss this with the leadership of your project.
>> All announcements about the existence of a third party ci will be
>> redirected to the third party systems wikipage.
> While I agree with Dmitry that I don't tend to think posting these
> announcements to the list is very spammy, I also don't know the history
> behind these decisions, and I'm not opinionated enough to get involved in
> that discussion.
> As for third party CI announcements, I think we should do whatever the
> rest of the OpenStack projects do; being different here just creates
> pain for everyone.
> // jim
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Thanks Jim:

The expectation is that ci systems report their existence and current
status on: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems

That way we have one place for people wanting to consume that
information to find it. If we have multiple places, operators feel they
have done their duty informing their community of status and don't
update their wikipage. Developers use the wikipage and individual ci
system pages to ascertain the status of a given system prior to taking
action with that system.

Just yesterday someone started to announce a system outage in infra:
(this person is a responsible operator and has demonstrated to me they
are worthy of my trust, this is simply an example of what some folks
think is the right thing to do). I assured them that updating their
wikipage (which they already had done) was sufficient and that channel
updates in infra were just noise and not helpful in achieving their goal.

I don't expect anyone to have to grep channel logs to know the status of
a system. That is the purpose of the wikipage. People wishing to convey
and consume information about the system will continue to be directed there.

Thanks for listening,

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list