<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 9 Feb 2021, at 16:29, Wesley Hayutin <<a href="mailto:whayutin@redhat.com" class="">whayutin@redhat.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class=""><b class="">Upgrade jobs in master:</b></div>
<div class="">All the upgrade jobs in master are non-voting based on policy and to give the upgrade developers time to compensate for new developments and features. The feedback provided by CI can still occur in our periodic jobs in RDO's software factory
zuul. Upgrade jobs will remain running in periodic but removed from upstream.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Specifically: ( master ) </div>
<div class="">tripleo-ci-centos-8-standalone-upgrade<br class="">
tripleo-ci-centos-8-undercloud-upgrade<br class="">
tripleo-ci-centos-8-scenario000-multinode-oooq-container-upgrades<br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I'll note there is interest in keeping the undercloud-upgrade, however we are able to remove all the upgrade jobs for a branch in the upstream we can also remove a content-provider job. I would encourage folks to consider undercloud-upgrade for
periodic only. </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
<div>+1 I think this makes sense. These jobs are long running and consume quite a few VM over that lengthy period of time.</div>
<br class="">
</body>
</html>