Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

On 2017-01-14 10:55:14 +0100 (+0100), Bálint Réczey wrote: [...] > Providing a puppet module could be a criterion for accepting new > services [...] This is how we do it for the OpenStack community infrastructure. If you're proposing a new service, automate its deployment with a Puppet module or

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

Hi, 2016-12-08 23:24 GMT+01:00 Paul Wise : > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: > >> Should we not have public test instances of all these things ? > > If this will increase the bus factor of Debian services, that would be great. > If this will just be a time

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino wrote: > ... and there are no real requirements to > test the current setup with new Debian releases. You may want to subscribe to debian-services-admin, where DSA have requested testing of services against Debian stretch:

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: > Should we not have public test instances of all these things ? If this will increase the bus factor of Debian services, that would be great. If this will just be a time sink for the people involved, that would be less great. On balance, it

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

Dear Ian, I just thought I could give my 2c to this idea (which I like and share). On 28 November 2016 at 13:04, Ian Jackson wrote: > Should we not have public test instances of all these things ? Yes. > I suggest we should declare (perhaps as a DEP?) a

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 at 07:55:33 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > [0] for services that currently run via cron, it would be interesting to > transition to running them using systemd service + timer, so that it's > easy to run the service manually in the same environment when run > manually (systemctl

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

On 07/12/16 at 20:27 +, Niels Thykier wrote: > Lucas Nussbaum: > > Hi, > > > > On 28/11/16 at 12:04 +, Ian Jackson wrote: > >> [...] > > > > No. > > > > I think that we should rather push for using tools such as Vagrant or > > Docker to provide a way to easily create development

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

Lucas Nussbaum writes: > On 28/11/16 at 12:04 +, Ian Jackson wrote: >> We are running a multitude of services. >> Our usual approach to these services is that we fix things when they >> break, test our client code against the live instance (with perhaps a >> special area

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

Lucas Nussbaum: > Hi, > > On 28/11/16 at 12:04 +, Ian Jackson wrote: >> [...] > > No. > > I think that we should rather push for using tools such as Vagrant or > Docker to provide a way to easily create development environments for > services. > > [...] > > Lucas > So I happily agree

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

Hi, On 28/11/16 at 12:04 +, Ian Jackson wrote: > We are running a multitude of services. > > Our usual approach to these services is that we fix things when they > break, test our client code against the live instance (with perhaps a > special area of the database - eg the `experimental'

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure [and 1 more messages]

Holger Levsen writes ("Re: Test instance of our infrastructure"): > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 12:04:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > I suggest we should declare (perhaps as a DEP?) > > or a wiki page, at least at first…? Sure, whatever. > > * Most of our services

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

Ian Jackson: > We are running a multitude of services. > > [...] > > Should we not have public test instances of all these things ? > > [...] > > My starting points for answers to these questions are something like > this: > > [...] > > If we wrote some of this down then infrastructure

Re: Test instance of our infrastructure

Hi Ian, On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 12:04:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > Should we not have public test instances of all these things ? seems like a great idea, thanks for bringing this up! a few minor comments: > I suggest we should declare (perhaps as a DEP?) or a wiki page, at least at

Test instance of our infrastructure

We are running a multitude of services. Our usual approach to these services is that we fix things when they break, test our client code against the live instance (with perhaps a special area of the database - eg the `experimental' suite). I have found writing server-side software in this