Open Stack

On 02/11/2014 04:57 AM, Alan Pevec wrote:
> Hi Mark and Anita,
> 
> could we declare stable/havana neutron gate jobs good enough at this point?
> There are still random failures as this no-op change shows
> https://review.openstack.org/72576
> but I don't think they're stable/havana specific.
> 
>>> Do we have a list of those somewhere?
>> Pulled out where following Neutron patches (IMHO all innocent for gate
>> breaking):
>> https://review.openstack.org/62206
>> https://review.openstack.org/67214
>> https://review.openstack.org/70232
> 
> I've resubmitted those without "Removed from the gate..." lines in the
> commit message, waiting for rechecks now.
> 
>>> I'm particularly interested in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/66149/ as a fix for
>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/keystone/+bug/1251123
> 
> This one is last remaining exception request for 2013.2.2 and is
> waiting for the master change to be reviewed:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/Ida39b4699ed6c568609a5121573fc3be5c4ab2f4,n,z
> I hope keystone core could review this one quickly so that backport
> can be updated and merged.
> 
> Thanks!
> Alan
> 
I will reaffirm here what I had stated in IRC.

If Mark McClain gives his assent for stable/havana patches to be
approved, I will not remove Neutron stable/havana patches from the gate
queue before they start running tests. If after they start running
tests, they demonstrate that they are failing, I will remove them from
the gate as a means to keep the gate flowing. If the stable/havana gate
jobs are indeed stable, I will not be removing any patches that should
be merged.

Adding commit lines is the fastest way to submit a new patchset without
affecting the code in the patch (hence removing it from the gate queue),
so thank you for removing those additional lines in the commit message.

Thank you,
Anita.