Open Stack

HI Sukhdev,

I also wonder how many folks are in that camp.
Regardless, if we can go from 85 --> 2 (or any other much smaller number), then that is a good thing.
Also, from an open source point of view, I’d like to see new contributors/vendors contributing effort on value-add innovation, and less on recreating/maintaining the ‘common’ portions of 3rd party ci.

Ramy

From: Sukhdev Kapur [mailto:sukhdevkapur at gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 1:39 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!

Hi Ramy,

While I agree, in principal, with this line of thinking and goal, my concern will be how much extra work is it going to create for existing CI owners?
Our Ci system has been stable for a long time, and we put in a good amount of effort to get it to that point. Our CI is not based upon zuul framework. Zuul was still under discussion at the time when we put together our CI. We use Jenkins as front end, along with Gerrit triggers, and AWS for posting/preserving results/log.  We have dedicated back-end servers for  testing.

My paranoia at this point will be to learn a new framework, risk breaking things and taking a huge effort to get things stabilized - without much additional ROI.
Am I overreacting here or does my argument makes sense?

I wonder how many folks will be in that camp?

Sukhdev




On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Asselin, Ramy <ramy.asselin at hp.com<mailto:ramy.asselin at hp.com>> wrote:
All Third-Party CI operators:

We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed & open-source solutions.
Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution.

If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us.

We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4].

For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/

If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5].

Thanks!
Ramy

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems
[2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html
[3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101
[4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z
[5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings



__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150421/6172cbda/attachment.html>