Open Stack

Thanks Takashi!

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 6:44 PM Takashi Kajinami <tkajinam at redhat.com>
wrote:

> Because we haven't heard any objections for one week, I invited the three
> people
> I mentioned to the puppet-manager-core group.
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:42 PM Takashi Kajinami <tkajinam at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you, Marios and the team for your time in the meeting.
>>
>> Based on our discussion, I'll nominate the following three volunteers
>> from tripleo core team
>> to the puppet-openstack core team.
>>  - Marios Andreou
>>  - Ronelle Landy
>>  - Wes Hayutin
>>
>> Their scope of +2 will be limited to tripleo job definitions (which are
>> written in .zuul.yaml or zuul.d/*.yaml) at this moment.
>>
>> I've not received any objections so far (Thank you Tobias for sharing
>> your thoughts !) but will wait for one week
>> to be open for any feedback from the other cores or people around.
>>
>> My current plan is to add a specific hashtag so that these reviewers can
>> easily find the related changes like [1]
>> but please let me know if anybody has preference.
>> [1]
>> https://review.opendev.org/q/hashtag:%22puppet-tripleo-job%22+(status:open%20OR%20status:merged)
>>
>> P.S.
>> I received some interest about maintaining puppet modules (especially our
>> own integration jobs),
>> so will have some people involved in that part as well.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 8:57 PM Marios Andreou <marios at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 2:46 PM Takashi Kajinami <tkajinam at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Marios,
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 8:10 PM Marios Andreou <marios at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM Takashi Kajinami <tkajinam at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Hi team,
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi Takashi
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> > As you know, we currently have TripleO jobs in some of the puppet
>>> repos
>>> >> > to ensure a change in puppet side doesn't break TripleO which
>>> consumes
>>> >> > some of the modules.
>>> >>
>>> >> in case it isn't clear and for anyone else reading, you are referring
>>> >> to things like [1].
>>> >
>>> > This is a nitfixing but puppet-pacemaker is a repo under the TripleO
>>> project.
>>> > I intend a job like
>>> >
>>> https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=puppet-nova-tripleo-standalone&project=openstack/puppet-nova
>>> > which is maintained under puppet repos.
>>> >
>>>
>>> ack thanks for the clarification ;) makes more sense now
>>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Because these jobs hugely depend on the job definitions in TripleO
>>> repos,
>>> >> > I'm wondering whether we can invite a few cores from the TripleO CI
>>> team
>>> >> > to the puppet-openstack core group to maintain these jobs.
>>> >> > I expect the scope here is very limited to tripleo job definitions
>>> and doesn't
>>> >> > expect any +2 for other parts.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I'd be nice if I can hear any thoughts on this topic.
>>> >>
>>> >> Main question is what kind of maintenance do you have in mind? Is it
>>> >> that these jobs are breaking often and they need fixes in the
>>> >> puppet-repos themselves so we need more cores there? (though... I
>>> >> would expect the fixes to be needed in tripleo-ci where the job
>>> >> definitions are, unless the repos are overriding those definitions)?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > We define our own base tripleo-puppet-ci-centos-8-standalone job[4] and
>>> > each puppet module defines their own tripleo job[5] by overriding the
>>> base job,
>>> > so that we can define some basic items like irellevant files or voting
>>> status
>>> > for all puppet modules in a single place.
>>> >
>>> > [4]
>>> https://github.com/openstack/puppet-openstack-integration/blob/master/zuul.d/tripleo.yaml
>>> > [5] https://github.com/openstack/puppet-nova/blob/master/.zuul.yaml
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Or is it that you don't have enough folks to get fixes merged so this
>>> >> is mostly about growing the pool of reviewers?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Yes. My main intention is to have more reviewers so that we can fix
>>> our CI jobs timely.
>>> >
>>> > Actually the proposal came to my mind when I was implementing the
>>> following changes
>>> > to solve very frequent job timeouts which we currently observe in
>>> puppet-nova wallaby.
>>> > IMO these changes need more attention from TripleO's perspective
>>> rather than puppet's
>>> > perspective.
>>> >
>>> https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:%22tripleo-tempest%22+(status:open)
>>> >
>>> > In the past when we introduced content provider jobs, we ended up with
>>> a bunch of patches
>>> > submitted to both tripleo jobs and puppet jobs. Having some people
>>> from TripleO team
>>> > would help moving forward such a transition more smoothly.
>>> >
>>> > In the past we have had three people (Alex, Emilien and I) involved in
>>> both TripleO and puppet
>>> > but since Emilien has shifted this focus, we have now 2 activities
>>> left.
>>> > Additional one or two people would help us move patches forward more
>>> efficiently.
>>> > (Since I can't approve my own patch.)
>>> >
>>> >> I think limiting the scope to just the contents of zuul.d/ or
>>> >> .zuul.yaml can work; we already have a trust based system in TripleO
>>> >> with some cores only expected to exercise their voting rights in
>>> >> particular repos even though they have full voting rights across all
>>> >> tripleo repos).
>>> >>
>>> >> Are you able to join our next tripleo-ci community call? It is on
>>> >> Tuesday 1330 UTC @ [2] and we use [3] for the agenda. If you can join,
>>> >> perhaps we can work something out depending on what you need.
>>> >> Otherwise no problem let's continue to discuss here
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Sure. I can join and bring up this topic.
>>> > I'll keep this thread to hear some opinions from the puppet side as
>>> well.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> ok thanks look forward to discussing on Tuesday then,
>>>
>>> regards, marios
>>>
>>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> regards, marios
>>> >>
>>> >> [1]
>>> https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/builds?job_name=tripleo-ci-centos-8-scenario004-standalone&project=openstack/puppet-pacemaker
>>> >> [2] https://meet.google.com/bqx-xwht-wky
>>> >> [3] https://hackmd.io/MMg4WDbYSqOQUhU2Kj8zNg?both
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Thank you,
>>> >> > Takashi
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20210526/07db2eef/attachment.html>