Open Stack

On 25 August 2017 at 13:27, Brad P. Crochet <brad at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Ben Nemec <openstack at nemebean.com> wrote:
> > I think I'm +0 on this.  On the one hand we do have the gating job on
> > Mistral, on the other hand our gate jobs don't exercise all of the
> > functionality of some projects, especially Mistral.  I know in the past
> > introspection has been broken by changes in Mistral, and that wouldn't be
> > caught by gate jobs.  If we start using master all the time that becomes
> a
> > blocker for TripleO since it will prevent our OVB jobs from passing.
> >
> > So I can understand the desire to use master of a tightly coupled project
> > like Mistral, but it does open a hole in our promotion pipeline which I
> > don't feel great about.  If we had an OVB job running on every patch (and
> > respected by the Mistral cores) I'd be +1 with no reservations.
>
> I am +1 on this. However, I do echo Ben's concerns. I will bring this
> up with the Mistral group at the PTG. We already have an experimental
> job available, but I'm guessing the major concern will be the amount
> of time it takes for a TripleO job to run. It would likely double the
> amount of time that a Mistral patch takes to get through CI.
>

I agree with you both. So would be +1 to adding Mistral (and adding an OVB
job to Mistral).

I think the length of time will be a concern, but I think the overhead of
Mistral contributors having to understand and debug failed tripleo gates
could be a bigger problem.


>
> >
> >
> > On 08/24/2017 04:04 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote:
> >>
> >> Greetings,
> >>
> >> I'd like to propose that the mistral project be added to the list of
> >> projects where in CI the very latest built packages are added to each
> CI run
> >> [1].
> >>
> >> This will help get patches that depend on mistral patches to more
> quickly
> >> be tested and merged.  For example Honza's patch [2] depends on a merged
> >> mistral change.  The mistral change has not yet landed in a tripleo
> build
> >> and mistral is not on the auto-update list, so the patch fails.
> >>
> >> Please respond if you would like to see mistral added or have any
> comments
> >> or concerns.
> >>
> >> Note that we are able to consider mistral for auto-updates because the
> >> mistral project has a voting tripleo job [3] and the tripleo project
> can be
> >> assured that the latest mistral patches will not break tripleo-ci.
> >>
> >> I would encourage other projects to consider adding tripleo jobs to
> their
> >> project to enable auto-updates as well [4] <my_shameless_plug>
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-quickstart/blob/
> master/config/release/tripleo-ci/master.yml#L54-L70
> >> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469608/
> >> [3]
> >> https://github.com/openstack-infra/project-config/blob/
> master/zuul/layout.yaml#L11665
> >> [4]
> >> https://docs.openstack.org/tripleo-docs/latest/
> contributor/check_gates.html
> >>
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> >> 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
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Brad P. Crochet, RHCA, RHCE, RHCVA, RHCDS
> Principal Software Engineer
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170828/80ee567e/attachment.html>