[Openstack] Should the OpenStack API re-use the EC2 credentials?
Trey Morris
trey.morris at rackspace.com
Thu Feb 24 22:36:16 UTC 2011
I see. So their use would in general be for the use of automated systems?
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Eric Day <eday at oddments.org> wrote:
> The extra branches are just an implementation detail, we can have
> them or not. It's really a matter of if it's possible and/or easier
> to have jenkins fire off new jobs with arbitrary branches that need
> to be merged with trunk for each job vs merging and pushing to a
> staging branch and have the jobs test that. Either way, we get the
> same result. We will also have the flexibility to test arbitrary
> branches before proposing either way. These extra "trunks" will not
> need to be managed, as tarmac/jenkins will control them.
>
> -Eric
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 04:24:11PM -0600, Trey Morris wrote:
> > I'm curious what the point of having a line of trunks for a commit to
> > bounce down on its way to trunk would gain us other than having to
> manage
> > a line of trunks. What's wrong with status quo branch management
> (other
> > than tests)? What's wrong with having the commit sit in its LP topic
> > branch, which is every bit as publicly accessible as any branch in the
> > line of trunks would be? The test system (or anyone who wants to play
> with
> > it) can just grab trunk merge the topic branch and run however many
> levels
> > or types of tests we deem appropriate. Success = trunk. Fail = test
> fail
> > status in the test report.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Mark Washenberger
> > <mark.washenberger at rackspace.com> wrote:
> > >> This is what we're working on, and what Justin is proposing,
> Mark.
> > >>
> > >> Basically, in Drizzle-land, people propose a merge into trunk,
> Hudson
> > >> picks up that proposal, pulls the brnach into lp:drizzle/staging,
> > >> builds Drizzle on all supported platforms (>12 OS/distro combos),
> > then
> > >> runs all automated regression testing against the proposed branch
> > (can
> > >> take 3 or more hours).
> > >>
> > >> We're proposing the same kind of automation for OpenStack.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I misunderstood what Justin was proposing. This sounds good
> to
> > me.
> > >
> > > We could also do this without a staging branch by having the
> automated
> > system check out trunk and merge the proposed branch locally.
> >
> > Sure, this is, of course, quite possible, too :)
> >
> > One thing that a staging-first branch allows, though, is to set up
> an
> > environment where some *very* minor or style-only type commits can
> be
> > fed into trunk directly without having to got through the full
> testing
> > loop...
> > -jay
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> > Post to : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> > Post to : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20110224/a842b96e/attachment.html>
More information about the Openstack
mailing list