[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ironic][heat] Adding back the tripleo check job
Steven Hardy
shardy at redhat.com
Mon Nov 30 22:09:49 UTC 2015
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 03:19:18PM +0000, Derek Higgins wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> A few months tripleo switch from its devtest based CI to one that was
> based on instack. Before doing this we anticipated disruption in the ci jobs
> and removed them from non tripleo projects.
>
> We'd like to investigate adding it back to heat and ironic as these are
> the two projects where we find our ci provides the most value. But we can
> only do this if the results from the job are treated as voting.
>
> In the past most of the non tripleo projects tended to ignore the
> results from the tripleo job as it wasn't unusual for the job to broken for
> days at a time. The thing is, ignoring the results of the job is the reason
> (the majority of the time) it was broken in the first place.
> To decrease the number of breakages we are now no longer running master
> code for everything (for the non tripleo projects we bump the versions we
> use periodically if they are working). I believe with this model the CI jobs
> we run have become a lot more reliable, there are still breakages but far
> less frequently.
>
> What I proposing is we add at least one of our tripleo jobs back to both
> heat and ironic (and other projects associated with them e.g. clients,
> ironicinspector etc..), tripleo will switch to running latest master of
> those repositories and the cores approving on those projects should wait for
> a passing CI jobs before hitting approve. So how do people feel about doing
> this? can we give it a go? A couple of people have already expressed an
> interest in doing this but I'd like to make sure were all in agreement
> before switching it on.
+1 - TripleO has quite frequently encountered heat related bugs in the
past, and it'd be good to catch those earlier if at all possible.
Steve
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list