[openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

Ian Cordasco sigmavirus24 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 22 18:23:27 UTC 2016

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Perez <thingee at gmail.com>
Reply: Mike Perez <thingee at gmail.com>
Date: February 22, 2016 at 11:51:39
To: Ian Cordasco <sigmavirus24 at gmail.com>, OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

> On 02/22/2016 07:19 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Perez  
> > Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)  
> > Date: February 19, 2016 at 19:21:13
> > To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org  
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016
> >
> >> On 02/18/2016 09:05 PM, Cody A.W. Somerville wrote:
> >>> There is no implicit (or explicit) requirement for the tests to be a
> >>> full integration/end-to-end test. Mocks and/or unit tests would be
> >>> sufficient to satisfy "test-driven gate".
> >>
> >> While I do agree there is no requirement, I would not be satisfied with
> >> us giving up on having functional or integration tests from a project
> >> because of the available implementations. It's reasons like this that
> >> highlight Poppy being different from the rest of OpenStack.
> >
> > Would third-party integration CI not be satisfactory?
> That would be fine, but are these commercial CDN solutions going to be
> interested in hosting them?

I don't know that for certain and I don't know if the Poppy team has gotten so far as asking them. I'd also be unsurprised if this resulted in a catch 22 of sorts where CDNs will only work on those if Poppy is OpenStack and we'd only be happy accepting Poppy if it had those third-party CI services.

Ian Cordasco

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list