Open Stack

Jens Harbott <j.harbott at x-ion.de> writes:

> 2017-11-23 5:28 GMT+00:00 Tristan Cacqueray <tdecacqu at redhat.com>:
> ...
>> TL;DR; Is it alright if we re-enable this CI and report those tests on
>>       zuul-jobs patchsets?
>
> I like the general idea, but please wait for more feedback until doing so.

I am in favor of the idea in general, thanks!

> Also, IMHO it would be better if you could change the "recheck-sf"
> trigger to something that does not also rerun upstream checks. What
> seems to work well for other projects is "run ci-name", where ci-name
> is the name of the Gerrit account.

Actually, I'd prefer that we do the opposite.  I'd like the recheck
command for both to just be "recheck".  There's no harm in both systems
re-running tests for a change in this case, and it keeps things simpler
for developers.  The requirements in
https://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/third_party.html#requirements
state that all systems should honor "recheck".  I'd like to go beyond
that in zuul-jobs and say that third-party ci systems on that repo
should *only* honor "recheck".

In the meeting today we agreed that we should start by reporting without
voting, gain some confidence, then enable +1/-1 voting.

-Jim