Open Stack

On 2017-01-17 02:08 AM, Isaac Beckman wrote:
> I think that it would also be a good idea to have the option to let the CI
> maintainers add some useful information on the current status.
> It is very helpful to know that the CI system is under maintenance which
> is the reason why it hasn't been reporting for the last week or so...
>
> Isaac Beckman
>
> Office: +972-3-6897874
> Fax: +972-3-6897755
> Mobile: +972-50-2680180
> Email: isaacb at il.ibm.com
>
> IBM XIV, Cloud Storage Solutions (previously HSG)
> www.ibm.com/storage/disk/xiv
>   
>
>
>
> From:   "Jay S. Bryant" <jsbryant at electronicjungle.net>
> To:     "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Date:   16/01/2017 21:56
> Subject:        Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Improving Vendor Driver
> Discoverability
>
>
>
>
>
> On 01/16/2017 12:19 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote:
>>> On Jan 16, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Jay S. Bryant
> <jsbryant at electronicjungle.net> wrote:
>>> On 01/13/2017 10:29 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
>>>> The way validation works is completely up to the project team. In my
> research
>>>> as shown in the Summit etherpad [5] there's a clear trend in projects
> doing
>>>> continuous integration for validation. If we wanted to we could also
> have the
>>>> marketplace give the current CI results, which was also requested in
> the
>>>> feedback from driver maintainers.
>>> Having the CI results reported would be an interesting experiment. I
> wonder if having the results even more publicly reported would result in
> more stable CI's.  It is a dual edged sword however. Given the instability
> of many CI's it could make OpenStack look bad to customers who don't
> understand what they are looking at.  Just my thoughts on that idea.
>> That?s very useful feedback. Having that kind of background upfront is
> really helpful. As we make updates on the display side, we can take into
> account if certain attributes are potentially unreliable or at a higher
> risk of showing instability and have the interface better support that
> without it looking like everything is failing and a river of red X?s. Are
> there other things that might be similar?
>> Jonathan
>>
> Jonathan,
>
> Glad to be of assistance.
>
> I think reporting some percentage of success might be the most accurate
> way to report the CI results.  Not necessarily flagging it good or bed
> but leave it for the consumers to see and compare.  Also combine that
> with Anita's idea of when the CI last successfully reported and I think
> it could give a good barometer for consumers. Our systems all have their
> rough times so we need to avoid a 'snapshot in time' view and provide
> more of a 'activity over time' view.  Third party CI is a good barometer
> of community activity and attention, but not always 100% accurate.
>
> Obviously there will need to be some information included with the
> results explaining what they are and helping guide interpretations.
>
> Jay
>
>

Since the information about system details (contact information, current 
status - with the option to fill in as many details as you like on your 
individual wikipage) already exists here: 
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems I think it would be 
easy to add a link to this wikipage.

Thanks,
Anita.