On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Steven Hardy <sha...@redhat.com> wrote: [...] > > I completely agree we need this coverage, and honestly we should have > had it a long time ago, but we need to make progress on this last > critical blocker for pike, while continuing to make progress on the CI > coverage (which should certainly be a top priority for the Lifecycle > squad, as soon as we have this completely new-for-pike minor updates > workflow fully implemented and debugged). > > Thanks, > > Steve
I guess my -2 was more to highlight the problem and make sure we take some actions. I removed it this morning and you're free to merge the code if you're happy with it. Several things: 1) I created https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1720153 to track work that will be done for this CI coverage, please use it when doing the work. 2) I'll allocate some time to work on it with the upgrade team. 3) Since we'll need a new job, I think we might remove some jobs that don't bring much value to keep. For example, the multinode baremetal jobs in Queens could be replaced by this container minor update testing, what do you think? 4) I wanted to point out (and repeat again from what we said at PTG and even before): we should get CI framework ready before implementing features like this. Every time we bring this up, I hear "now it's too late" or "we had no time to work on it". I understand the gap and the fast pace on the upgrade front, but I really think having more investment in CI will help on the long term. If upgrade folks need help on CI, bring it to the TripleO CI squad so they can maybe help, etc... Thanks, -- Emilien Macchi __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
