[TripleO][Validations] Tag convention

Cédric Jeanneret cjeanner at redhat.com
Fri May 10 09:12:12 UTC 2019

On 5/8/19 9:07 AM, Cédric Jeanneret wrote:
> On 5/7/19 6:24 PM, Mohammed Naser wrote:
>> On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 12:12 PM Emilien Macchi <emilien at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 4:44 PM Cédric Jeanneret <cjeanner at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> We're currently working hard in order to provide a nice way to run
>>>> validations within a deploy (aka in-flight validations).
>>>> We can already call validations provided by the tripleo-validations
>>>> package[1], it's working just fine.
>>>> Now comes the question: "how can we disable the validations?". In order
>>>> to do that, we propose to use a standard tag in the ansible
>>>> roles/playbooks, and to add a "--skip-tags <tag>" when we disable the
>>>> validations via the CLI or configuration.
>>>> After a quick check in the tripleoclient code, there apparently is a tag
>>>> named "validation", that can already be skipped from within the client.
>>>> So, our questions:
>>>> - would the reuse of "validation" be OK?
>>>> - if not, what tag would be best in order to avoid confusion?
>>>> We also have the idea to allow to disable validations per service. For
>>>> this, we propose to introduce the following tag:
>>>> - validation-<service>, like "validation-nova", "validation-neutron" and
>>>> so on
>>>> What do you think about those two additions?
>>> Such as variables, I think we should prefix all our variables and tags with tripleo_ or something, to differentiate them from any other playbooks our operators could run.
>>> I would rather use "tripleo_validations" and "tripleo_validation_nova" maybe.
> hmm. what-if we open this framework to a wider audience? For instance,
> openshift folks might be interested in some validations (I have Ceph in
> mind), and might find weird or even bad to have "tripleo-something"
> (with underscore or dashes).
> Maybe something more generic?
> "vf(-nova)" ?
> "validation-framework(-nova)" ?
> Or even "opendev-validation(-nova)"
> Since there are also a possibility to ask for a new package name for
> something more generic without the "tripleo" taint..

Can we agree on something? I really like the
"opendev-validation(-service)", even if it's a bit long. For automated
thins, it's still good IMHO.

Would love to get some feedback on that so that we can go forward with
the validations :).



> Cheers,
> C.
>> Just chiming in here.. the pattern we like in OSA is using dashes for
>> tags, I think having something like 'tripleo-validations' and
>> 'tripleo-validations-nova' etc
>>> Wdyt?
>>> --
>>> Emilien Macchi

Cédric Jeanneret
Software Engineer - OpenStack Platform
Red Hat EMEA

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190510/3f121e7d/attachment.sig>

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list