Open Stack

Sean,

I have tabs opened to:
http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/gate.html
http://status.openstack.org/elastic-recheck/data/uncategorized.html

and periodically catch up on openstack-qa on IRC as well, i just did
not realize this wsgi gate bug was hurting the gate this much.

So, could we somehow indicate (email? or one of the web pages above?)
where occassional helpers can watch and pitch in when needed.

thanks,
dims


On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
> On 09/15/2014 05:52 PM, Brant Knudson wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com
>> <mailto:mikal at stillhq.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:30 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com
>>     <mailto:rbryant at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>     > On 09/15/2014 05:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>     >> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:07:13AM +1000, Michael Still wrote:
>>     >>> Just an observation from the last week or so...
>>     >>>
>>     >>> The biggest problem nova faces at the moment isn't code review latency. Our
>>     >>> biggest problem is failing to fix our bugs so that the gate is reliable.
>>     >>> The number of rechecks we've done in the last week to try and land code is
>>     >>> truly startling.
>>     >>
>>     >> I consider both problems to be pretty much equally as important. I don't
>>     >> think solving review latency or test reliabilty in isolation is enough to
>>     >> save Nova. We need to tackle both problems as a priority. I tried to avoid
>>     >> getting into my concerns about testing in my mail on review team bottlenecks
>>     >> since I think we should address the problems independantly / in parallel.
>>     >
>>     > Agreed with this.  I don't think we can afford to ignore either one of them.
>>
>>     Yes, that was my point. I don't mind us debating how to rearrange
>>     hypervisor drivers. However, if we think that will solve all our
>>     problems we are confused.
>>
>>     So, how do we get people to start taking bugs / gate failures more
>>     seriously?
>>
>>     Michael
>>
>>
>> What do you think about having an irc channel for working through gate
>> bugs? I've always found looking at gate failures frustrating because I
>> seem to be expected to work through these by myself, and maybe
>> somebody's already looking at it or has more information that I don't
>> know about. There have been times already where a gate bug that could
>> have left everything broken for a while wound up fixed pretty quickly
>> because we were able to find the right person hanging out in irc.
>> Sometimes all it takes is for someone with the right knowledge to be
>> there. A hypothetical exchange:
>>
>> rechecker: I got this error where the tempest-foo test failed ... http://...
>> tempest-expert: That test calls the compute-bar nova API
>> nova-expert: That API calls the network-baz neutron API
>> neutron-expert: When you call that API you need to also call this other
>> API to poll for it to be done... is nova doing that?
>> nova-expert: Nope. Fix on the way.
>
> Honestly, the #openstack-qa channel is a completely appropriate place
> for that. Plus it already has a lot of the tempest experts.
> Realistically anyone that works on these kinds of fixes tend to be there.
>
>         -Sean
>
> --
> Sean Dague
> http://dague.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims