On 5/10/19 11:12 AM, Cédric Jeanneret wrote:
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@redhat.com> wrote:
On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 4:44 PM Cédric Jeanneret <cjeanner@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.
*opendev-validation-(service)* will do, since no one raised a voice against it :).
Would love to get some feedback on that so that we can go forward with the validations :).
Cheers,
C.
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 https://www.redhat.com/