[openstack-dev] [CI] Try to introduce RFC mechanism to CI.

Tang Chen tangchen at cn.fujitsu.com
Fri Oct 9 10:06:55 UTC 2015


On 10/09/2015 05:48 PM, Jordan Pittier wrote:
> Hi,
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Tang Chen <tangchen at cn.fujitsu.com 
> <mailto:tangchen at cn.fujitsu.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     CI systems will run tests for each patch once it is submitted or
>     modified.
>     But most CI systems occupy a lot of resource, and take a long time to
>     run tests (1 or 2 hours for one patch).
>
>     I think, not all the patches submitted need to be tested. Even
>     those patches
>     with an approved BP and spec may be reworked for 20+ versions. So
>     I think
>     CI should support a RFC (Require For Comments) mechanism for
>     developers
>     to submit and review the code detail and rework. When the patches are
>     fully ready, I mean all reviewers have agreed on the
>     implementation detail,
>     then CI will test the patches. 
>
> So have the humans do the hard work to eventually find out that the 
> patch breaks the world ?

No. Developers of course will run some tests themselves before they 
submit patches.
It is just a waste of resource if reviewers are discussing about where 
this function should be,
or what the function should be named. After all these details are agreed 
on, run the CI.

>     For a 20+ version patch-set, maybe 3 or 4 rounds
>     of tests are enough. Just test the last 3 or 4 versions.
>
>  How do know, when a new patchset arrives, that it's part of the last 
> 3 or 4 versions ?

I think it could work like this:
1. At first, developer submits v1 patch-set with RFC tag. CIs don't run.
2. After several versions reworked, like v5, v6, most reviewers have 
agreed on the implementation
     is OK. Then submit v7 without RFC tag. Then CIs run.
3. After 3, 4 rounds of tests, v10 patch-set could be merged.

Thanks.

>
>     This can significantly reduce CI overload.
>
>     This workflow appears in many other OSS communities, such as Linux
>     kernel,
>     qemu and libvirt. Testers won't test patches with a [RFC] tag in
>     the commit message.
>     So I want to enable CI to support a similar mechanism.
>
>     I'm not sure if it is a good idea. Please help to review the
>     following BP.
>
>     https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack-ci/+spec/ci-rfc-mechanism
>
>     Thanks.
>
>     __________________________________________________________________________
>     OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>     Unsubscribe:
>     OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>     <http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> I am running a 3rd party for Cinder. The amount of time to setup, 
> operate and watch after the CI results cost way more than the 1 or 2 
> servers it take to run the jobs. So, I don"t want to be a party pooper 
> here, but in my opinion I am not sure it's worth the effort.
>
> Note: I don"t know about nova or neutron.
>
> Jordan
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20151009/cc5104d1/attachment.html>


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list