Open Stack

2015-06-10 16:48 GMT+09:00 Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com>:
> On 06/10/2015 09:40 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
>> To solve it, we have decided the scope of Tempest as the etherpad
>> mentioned.
>>
>>> Are there any hints now on where we can start with our integration tests?
>>
>>
>> For the other projects, we are migrating the test framework of Tempest
>> to tempest-lib which is a library.
>> So each project can implement their own tests in each repository by
>> using the test framework of tempest-lib.
>
>
> So in my case we can start with putting test code to ironic-inspector tree
> using tempest-lib, right?

Yeah, right.
Neutron is already doing that.
maybe neutron/tests/api/ of Neutron repository will be a hint for it.

> Will it be possible to run tests on Ironic as well using plugin from
> ironic-inspector?

Yeah, it will be possible.
but I'm guessing ironic-inspector is optional and Ironic should not
depend on the gate test result of ironic-inspector.
So maybe you just need to run Ironic tests on ironic-inspector gate
tests, right?

>>> After a quick look at devstack-gate I got an impression that it's
>>> expecting
>>> tests as part of tempest:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/openstack-infra/devstack-gate/blob/master/devstack-vm-gate.sh#L600
>>>
>>> Our final goal is to have devstack gate test for Ironic and Inspector
>>> projects working together.
>>
>>
>> We have discussed external interfaces of Tempest on the summit, so
>> that Tempest gathers tests from each project repository and runs them
>> at the same time.
>> There is a qa-spec for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/184992/
>
>
> Cool, thanks! Does it mean that devstack-gate will also be updated to allow
> something like DEVSTACK_GATE_TEMPEST_PLUGINS="https://github.com/..."?

Yeah, will be.
The idea of this external interface is based on DevStack's one.
I think we will be able to use it on the gate like that.

Thanks
Ken'ichi Ohmichi

---

>>> On 06/10/2015 08:07 AM, Yuiko Takada wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Dmitry,
>>>>
>>>>      I guess the whole idea of new release models is NOT to tie projects
>>>>      to each other any more except for The Big Release twice a year :)
>>>> So
>>>>      I think no, we don't need to. We still can do it, if we have
>>>>      something to release by the time Ironic releases, but I suggest
>>>>      deciding it on case-by-case basis.
>>>>
>>>> OK, I see.
>>>>
>>>> One more concern, about Tempest integration test which I will implement
>>>> in V2.1.0,
>>>> it seems like that we cannot add Ironic-inspector's tests into Tempest
>>>> even if integration tests.
>>>> Please see:
>>>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-QA-in-the-big-tent
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Good catch. I guess the answer depends on where Ironic integration tests
>>> are
>>> going to live - we're going to live with them. Let me retarget this
>>> thread
>>> to a wider audience.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But I heard from you that Devananda thinks we need this in tempest
>>>> itself. [3]
>>>> Do you know something like current situation?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Yuiko Takada
>>>>
>>>> 2015-06-09 15:59 GMT+09:00 Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com
>>>> <mailto:dtantsur at redhat.com>>:
>>>>
>>>>      On 06/09/2015 03:49 AM, Yuiko Takada wrote:
>>>>
>>>>          Hi, Dmitry,
>>>>
>>>>          Thank you for notifying.
>>>>
>>>>               I've updated our summit etherpad [3] with whatever
>>>> priorities
>>>> I
>>>>               remembered, please have a look. I've also untargeted a few
>>>>          things in
>>>>               launchpad [4] (and will probably untarget more later on).
>>>>          Please
>>>>               assign yourself, if you want something done in this
>>>> release
>>>>          time frame.
>>>>
>>>>          I've assigned one item to myself in [3], and also I added one
>>>> BP
>>>>          to [4],
>>>>          so please take a look.
>>>>
>>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ironic-inspector/+spec/delete-db-api
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      Looks good, though I don't think it's a big priority for 2.0.0.
>>>>      Definitely worth doing for 2.1.0.
>>>>
>>>>      Thanks for assigning for tempest work, that's definitely a priority
>>>>      right now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          BTW, how do you think about Ironic-inspector's release model?
>>>>          You wrote "Version released with Ironic Liberty" as
>>>>          Ironic-inspector Version 2.1.0 in etherpad [3],
>>>>          but as you know, Ironic's release model has changed to feature
>>>>          releases.(right?)
>>>>          Should we make our release model same as Ironic?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      I guess the whole idea of new release models is NOT to tie projects
>>>>      to each other any more except for The Big Release twice a year :)
>>>> So
>>>>      I think no, we don't need to. We still can do it, if we have
>>>>      something to release by the time Ironic releases, but I suggest
>>>>      deciding it on case-by-case basis.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          Best Regards,
>>>>          Yuiko Takada(Inspector team member)
>>>>
>>>>          2015-06-08 20:38 GMT+09:00 Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com
>>>>          <mailto:dtantsur at redhat.com>
>>>>          <mailto:dtantsur at redhat.com <mailto:dtantsur at redhat.com>>>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>               Hello, Inspector team!
>>>>
>>>>               The renaming process is going pretty well, the last thing
>>>>          we need to
>>>>               do is to get Infra approval and actual rename [1][2].
>>>>
>>>>               I'd like to allow people (e.g. myself) to start packaging
>>>>          inspector
>>>>               under it's new name, so I'd like to make 2.0.0 release as
>>>>          soon as
>>>>               possible (as opposed to scheduling it to particular date).
>>>> All
>>>>               breaking changes should land by this release - I don't
>>>>          expect 3.0.0
>>>>               soon :)
>>>>
>>>>               I've updated our summit etherpad [3] with whatever
>>>> priorities
>>>> I
>>>>               remembered, please have a look. I've also untargeted a few
>>>>          things in
>>>>               launchpad [4] (and will probably untarget more later on).
>>>>          Please
>>>>               assign yourself, if you want something done in this
>>>> release
>>>>          time frame.
>>>>
>>>>               I would like 2.1.0 to be released with Ironic Liberty and
>>>> be
>>>>               properly supported.
>>>>
>>>>               Let me know what you think.
>>>>
>>>>               Cheers,
>>>>               Dmitry
>>>>
>>>>               [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/188030/
>>>>               [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/188798/
>>>>               [3]
>>>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-ironic-discoverd
>>>>               [4]
>>>>          https://bugs.launchpad.net/ironic-inspector/+milestone/2.0.0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>>               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://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>>          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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>>      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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev