[Openstack-operators] [openstack-operators][osops] Something other than NOOP in our jenkins tests
jj at chef.io
Tue Sep 29 20:57:17 UTC 2015
Seems solid Joe!
c: 512.619.0722 t: @jjasghar irc: j^2
On 9/29/15 3:47 PM, Joe Topjian wrote:
> I like that idea. I think it also ties in nicely with both the
> Monitoring and Tools WGs.
> Some projects have a directory called "contrib" that contains
> contributed items which might not be up to standard. Would that be a
> simple solution for the "dumping ground"?
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Kris G. Lindgren
> <klindgren at godaddy.com <mailto:klindgren at godaddy.com>> wrote:
> If we are going to be stringent on formatting – I would also like
> to see us be relatively consistent on arguments/env variables that
> are needed to make a script run. Some pull in ENV vars, some
> source a rc file, some just say already source your rc file to
> start with, others accept command options. It would be nice if we
> had a set of curated scripts that all worked in a similar fashion.
> Also, to Joe's point. It would be nice if we had two place for
> scripts. A "dumping ground" that people could share what they
> had. And a curated one, where everything within the curated repo
> follows a standard set of conventions/guidelines.
> Kris Lindgren
> Senior Linux Systems Engineer
> From: Joe Topjian
> Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 1:43 PM
> To: JJ Asghar
> Cc: "openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org>"
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-operators][osops]
> Something other than NOOP in our jenkins tests
> So this will require bash scripts to adhere to bashate before
> being accepted? Is it possible to have the check as non-voting?
> Does this open the door to having other file types be checked?
> IMHO, it's more important for the OSOps project to foster
> collaboration and contributions rather than worry about an
> accepted style.
> As an example, yesterday's commits used hard-tabs:
> I think we're going to see a lot of variation of styles coming in.
> I don't want to come off as sounding ignorant or disrespectful to
> other projects that have guidelines in place -- I fully understand
> and respect those decisions.
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:52 PM, JJ Asghar <jj at chef.io
> <mailto:jj at chef.io>> wrote:
> Awesome! That works!
> Best Regards,
> JJ Asghar
> c: 512.619.0722 <tel:512.619.0722> t: @jjasghar irc: j^2
> On 9/29/15 1:27 PM, Christian Berendt wrote:
> > On 09/29/2015 07:45 PM, JJ Asghar wrote:
> >> So this popped up today. This seems like something that
> should be
> >> leveraged in our gates/validations?
> > I prepared review requests to enable checks on the gates for
> > * osops-tools-monitoring:
> > * osops-tools-generic: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229043/
> > Christian.
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> <mailto:OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-operators