<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/09/2015 05:48 PM, Jordan Pittier
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAKgrcm1uQsLmwsaYOZAah+OUEnWJOMYSuFHczn3WjhR8cuUrA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Hi,<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Tang
Chen <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com" target="_blank">tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
CI systems will run tests for each patch once it is
submitted or modified.<br>
But most CI systems occupy a lot of resource, and take a
long time to<br>
run tests (1 or 2 hours for one patch).<br>
<br>
I think, not all the patches submitted need to be tested.
Even those patches<br>
with an approved BP and spec may be reworked for 20+
versions. So I think<br>
CI should support a RFC (Require For Comments) mechanism
for developers<br>
to submit and review the code detail and rework. When the
patches are<br>
fully ready, I mean all reviewers have agreed on the
implementation detail,<br>
then CI will test the patches. </blockquote>
<div>So have the humans do the hard work to eventually find
out that the patch breaks the world ?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
No. Developers of course will run some tests themselves before they
submit patches. <br>
It is just a waste of resource if reviewers are discussing about
where this function should be, <br>
or what the function should be named. After all these details are
agreed on, run the CI.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAKgrcm1uQsLmwsaYOZAah+OUEnWJOMYSuFHczn3WjhR8cuUrA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">For
a 20+ version patch-set, maybe 3 or 4 rounds<br>
of tests are enough. Just test the last 3 or 4 versions.<br>
</blockquote>
<div> How do know, when a new patchset arrives, that it's
part of the last 3 or 4 versions ?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think it could work like this:<br>
1. At first, developer submits v1 patch-set with RFC tag. CIs don't
run.<br>
2. After several versions reworked, like v5, v6, most reviewers have
agreed on the implementation<br>
is OK. Then submit v7 without RFC tag. Then CIs run.<br>
3. After 3, 4 rounds of tests, v10 patch-set could be merged.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAKgrcm1uQsLmwsaYOZAah+OUEnWJOMYSuFHczn3WjhR8cuUrA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
This can significantly reduce CI overload.<br>
<br>
This workflow appears in many other OSS communities, such
as Linux kernel,<br>
qemu and libvirt. Testers won't test patches with a [RFC]
tag in the commit message.<br>
So I want to enable CI to support a similar mechanism.<br>
<br>
I'm not sure if it is a good idea. Please help to review
the following BP.<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack-ci/+spec/ci-rfc-mechanism"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack-ci/+spec/ci-rfc-mechanism</a><br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
__________________________________________________________________________<br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a></blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Note: I don"t know about nova or neutron.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jordan </div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>