Open Stack

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Emilien Macchi <emilien at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 2:03 PM, James Slagle <james.slagle at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've been working on various patches to TripleO to make it possible
>> for the baremetal provisioning part of the workflow to be optional. In
>> such a scenario, TripleO wouldn't use Nova or Ironic to boot any
>> baremetal nodes. Instead it would rely on the nodes to be already
>> installed with an OS and powered on. We then use Heat to drive the
>> deployment of OpenStack on those nodes...that part of the process is
>> largely unchanged.
>>
>> One of the things this would allow TripleO to do is make use of CI
>> jobs using nodes just from the regular cloud providers in nodepool
>> instead of having to use our own TripleO cloud
>> (tripleo-test-cloud-rh1) to run all our jobs.
>>
>> I'm at a point where I can start working on patches to try and set
>> this up, but I wanted to provide this context so folks were aware of
>> the background.
>>
>> We'd probably start with our simplest configuration of a job with at
>> least 3 nodes (undercloud/controller/compute), and using CentOS
>> images. It looks like right now all multinode jobs are 2 nodes only
>> and use Ubuntu. My hope is that I/we can make some progress in
>> different multinode configurations and collaborate on any setup
>> scripts or ansible playbooks in a generally useful way. I know there
>> was interest in different multinode setups from the various deployment
>> teams at the cross project session in Austin.
>>
>> If there are any pitfalls or if there are any concerns about TripleO
>> going in this direction, I thought we could discuss those here. Thanks
>> for any feedback.
>
> It is more a question than a concern:
> are we still going to test baremetal introspection with Ironic
> somewhere in OpenStack?
>
> I like the way it goes but I'm wondering if the things that we're not
> going to test anymore will still be tested somewhere else (maybe in
> Ironic / Nova CI jobs) or maybe it's already the case and then stop me
> here.
>

I should have clarified: we're not moving away from still having our
own cloud running the TripleO jobs we have today.

This is about adding new jobs to test a different way of deploying via
TripleO Since we'd be able to use nodepool nodes directly to do that,
I'm proposing to do it that way.

If it pans out, I'd expect us to have a variety of jobs running with
different permutations so that we can have as much coverage as
possible.

-- 
-- James Slagle
--