[Openstack-operators] Packaging sample config versions

George Shuklin george.shuklin at gmail.com
Sat Dec 13 22:39:41 UTC 2014


On 12/13/2014 05:13 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> If I can help somehow, I'm ready to do something, but.... What should I
>> do, exactly?
> There's a lot that can be done. If you like working on CI stuff, then
> you could help me with building the package validation CI which I'm
> trying to (re-)work. All of this is currently inside the debian/juno of
> the openstack-meta-packages (in the openstack-tempest-ci package, which
> uses the openstack-deploy package).
>
> In the past, I saw *A LOT* of CIs, and most of them were written in a
> very dirty way. In fact, it's easy to write a CI, but it's very hard to
> write it well. I'm not saying my approach is perfect, but IMO it's
> moving toward the good direction.
All CIs are dirty pile of bash scripts. Some of them have enough dirt to 
give birth to new life. Which in turn starts  civilization, inventing 
computers and start doing own CI.

> For the moment, the packaged CI can do a full all-in-one deployment from
> scratch (starting with an empty VM), install and configure tempest, and
> run the Keystone tempest unit tests. I'm having issues with nova-compute
> using Qemu, and also the Neutron setup. But once that's fixed, I hope to
> be able to run most tempest tests. The next step will be to run on a
> multi-node setup.
>
> So, if you want to help on that, and as it seems you like doing CI
> stuff, you're more welcome to do so.
>
> Once we have this, then we could start building a repository with
> everything from trunk. And when that is done, starting the effort of
> building a 3rd party CI to do package validation on the gate.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
Oops, I don't feel I can't respond on this in smart way. I'm do not know 
some of the stuff (like tempest). It's better if you give one concrete 
area to work (something of scale of normal issue from tracker).

Btw: we talking about debian packages or ubuntu? They are differ - 
debian heavily relies on answers to debconfig, and ubuntu just put files 
in proper places without changing configs. We using chef for 
configuration, so ubuntu approach is better (when we starts doing 
openstack that was on of deciding factors between debian and ubuntu).



More information about the OpenStack-operators mailing list