Open Stack

Apologies for an almost duplicate post, I corrected the mistake in the example.  Ooops.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sullivan, Jon Paul
> Sent: 16 January 2014 15:38
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testing] Sharing
> information
> 
> > From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypipes at gmail.com] On Thu, 2014-01-16 at
> > 10:39 +0000, Sullivan, Jon Paul wrote:
> > > > From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mestery at siliconloons.com]
> > > >
> > > > FYI, here [1] are the meeting logs from today’s meeting.
> > > >
> > > > A couple of things have become apparent here:
> > > >
> > > > 1. No one has a working Neutron 3rd party testing rig yet which is
> > > > voting
> > > >     consistently. If I’ve missed something, please, someone
> > > > correct
> > me.
> > > > 2. People are still hung on issues around Jenkins/gerrit
> > integration.
> > >
> > > This issue can be very easily resolved if people were to use Jenkins
> > Job Builder [2] for the creation of their Jenkins testing jobs.  This
> > would allow the reuse of simple macros already in existence to
> > guarantee correct configuration of Jenkins jobs at 3rd party sites.
> > This would also allow simple reuse of the code used by the infra team
> > to create the openstack review and gate jobs, ensuring 3rd party
> > testers can generate the correct code from the gerrit change and also
> > publish results back in a standard way.
> > >
> > > I can't recommend Jenkins Job Builder highly enough if you use
> > Jenkins.
> > >
> > > [2] https://github.com/openstack-infra/jenkins-job-builder
> >
> > ++ It's a life-saver. We used it heavily in AT&T with our
> > Gerrit/Jenkins/Zuul CI system.
> >
> > -jay
> 
> It seems to me that shared JJB macros could be the most concise and
> simple way of describing 3rd party testing integration requirements.
> 
> So the follow-on questions are:
> 1. Can the 3rd party testing blueprint enforce, or at least link to,
>    use of specific JJB macros for integration to the openstack gerrit?
>       1a. Where should shared JJB code be stored?
> 2. Is it appropriate for 3rd party testers to share their tests as
>    JJB code, if they are willing?
>       2a. Would this live in the same location as (1a)?
> 
> For those unfamiliar with JJB, here is a little example of what you
> might do:
> 
> Example of (untested) JJB macro describing how to configure Jenkins to
> trigger from gerrit:
> 
> - trigger:
>     name: 3rd-party-gerrit-review
>     triggers:
>       - gerrit:
>          triggerOnPatchsetUploadedEvent: true
>          triggerOnChangeMergedEvent: false
>          triggerOnRefUpdatedEvent: false
>          triggerOnCommentAddedEvent: false
>          overrideVotes: true
>          gerritBuildSuccessfulVerifiedValue: 0
>          gerritBuildFailedVerifiedValue: -1
>          projects:
>            - projectCompareType: 'PLAIN'
>              projectPattern: '{project_pattern}'
>              branchCompareType: 'ANT'
>              branchPattern: '**'
>          failureMessage: '3rd party test {test_name} failed.  Contact is
> {test_contact}.  Test log is available at {test_log_url}'
> 

Corrected example:
> Use of macro in JJB file (again untested):
> -job:
>     name: my-test
>     triggers:
>         - 3rd-party-gerrit-review:
>             project_pattern: 'openstack/neutron.git'
>             test_name: 'my-3rd-party-test'	
>             test_contact: 'my-email at example.com'
>             test_log_url: 'http://mylogsarehere.com/'
> 
> >
> > > > 3. There are issues with devstack failing, but these seem to be
> > Neutron
> > > >     plugin specific. I’ve encouraged people to reach out on both
> the
> > > >     #openstack-neutron and #openstack-qa channels with questions.
> > > > 4. There is still some confusion on what tests to run. I think
> > > > this
> > is
> > > >     likely to be plugin dependent.
> > > > 5. There is some confusion around what version of devstack to use.
> > > >     My assumption has always been upstream master.
> > > >
> > > > Another general issue which I wanted to highlight here, which has
> > > > been brought up before, is that for companies/projects proposing
> > > > plugins, MechanismDrivers, and/or service plugins you really need
> > > > someone active on both the mailing list as well as the IRC
> channels.
> > > > This will help if your testing rig has issues, or if people need
> > > > help understanding why your test setup is failing with their
> patch.
> > > >
> > > > So, that’s the Neutron 3rd party testing update as we near the
> > > > deadline next week.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > Kyle
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_third_party_tes
> > > > ti
> > > > ng/2 014/networking_third_party_testing.2014-01-15-22.00.log.html
> > > >
> Thanks,
> Jon-Paul Sullivan ☺ Cloud Services - @hpcloud
> 
> Postal Address: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, Ballybrit Business Park,
> Galway.
> Registered Office: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, 63-74 Sir John
> Rogerson's Quay, Dublin 2.
> Registered Number: 361933
> 
> The contents of this message and any attachments to it are confidential
> and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message in
> error you should delete it from your system immediately and advise the
> sender.
> 
> To any recipient of this message within HP, unless otherwise stated, you
> should consider this message and attachments as "HP CONFIDENTIAL".
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Thanks, 
Jon-Paul Sullivan ☺ Cloud Services - @hpcloud
	
Postal Address: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, Ballybrit Business Park, Galway.
Registered Office: Hewlett-Packard Galway Limited, 63-74 Sir John Rogerson's Quay, Dublin 2. 
Registered Number: 361933
 
The contents of this message and any attachments to it are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message in error you should delete it from your system immediately and advise the sender.

To any recipient of this message within HP, unless otherwise stated, you should consider this message and attachments as "HP CONFIDENTIAL".