[openstack-dev] [trove] OpenStack Trove meeting minutes (2016-03-23)
tony at bakeyournoodle.com
Thu Mar 24 02:43:24 UTC 2016
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 07:52:10PM +0000, Amrith Kumar wrote:
> The meeting bot died during the meeting and therefore the logs on eavesdrop are useless. So I've had to get "Old-Fashioned-Logs(tm)".
> Action Items:
> <amrith> #action [all] If you have a patch set that you intend to resume work on, please put an update in it to that effect so we don't go abandon it under you ...
> <amrith> #action [all] if any of the abandoned patches looks like something you would like to pick up feel free
> <cp16net> #action cp16net reply to trove-dashboard ML question for RC2
> <amrith> #action [all] please review changes , , and link  in agenda and update the reviews
> <cp16net> #agreed flaper87 to WF+1 the patches in question  and 
> Meeting agenda is at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Trove/MeetingAgendaHistory#Trove_Meeting.2C_March_23.2C_2016
> Meeting minutes (complete transcript) is posted at
I'm still unsure of the value of adding these tests, and would love some
The current stable/liberty branch of trove fails
gate-trove-scenario-functional-dsvm-mysql with a summary of "FAILED (SKIP=23,
The 2 reviews in question fail with
"FAILED (SKIP=5, errors=2)" and
"FAILED (SKIP=18, errors=1)".
Granted these are heading in the right direction (in terms of fails). There is
no dependencies between the 2 reviews so I'll assume that if they're both
merged that number wont regress.
If you look at the logs all 3 runs failed "instance_resize_flavor"
So even with the changes merged you still don't end up with a gate job (even on
the experimental queue that you can "just use".
Yes you have improved testing coverage, but is it meaningful?
I'm not blocking you from merging them I just don't understand the benefit.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the OpenStack-dev