On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 2:31 PM, David Moreau Simard <d...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, > > As the migration of review.rdoproject.org to Zuul v3 draws closer, I'd like > to open up the discussion around how we want to approach an eventual > migration to Zuul v3 outside the gate. > I'd like to take this opportunity to allow ourselves to think outside the > box, think about how we would like to shape the CI of TripleO from upstream > to the product and then iterate to reach that goal. > > The reason why I mention "outside the gate" is because one of the features > of Zuul v3 is to dynamically construct its configuration by including > different repositories. > For example, the Zuul v3 from review.rdoproject.org can selectively include > parts of git.openstack.org/openstack-infra/tripleo-ci [1] and it will load > the configuration found there for jobs, nodesets, projects, etc. > > This opens a great deal of opportunities for sharing content or centralizing > the different playbooks, roles and job parameters in one single repository > rather than spread across different repositories across the production > chain. > If we do things right, this could give us the ability to run the same jobs > (which can be customized with parameters depending on the environment, > release, scenario, etc.) from the upstream gate down to > review.rdoproject.org and the later productization steps. > > There's pros and cons to the idea, but this is just an example of what we > can do with Zuul v3. > > Another example of an interesting thought from Sagi is to boot virtual > machines directly with pre-built images instead of installing the > undercloud/overcloud every time. > Something else to think about is how can we leverage all the Ansible things > from TripleO Quickstart in Zuul v3 natively. > > There's of course constraints about what we can and can't do in the upstream > gate... but let's avoid prematurely blocking ourselves and try to think > about what we want to do ideally and figure out if, and how, we can do it. > Whether it's about the things that we would like to do, can't do, or the > things that don't work, I'm sure the feedback and outcome of this could > prove useful to improve Zuul. > > How would everyone like to proceed ? Should we start an etherpad ? Do some > "design dession" meetings ? > I'm willing to help get the ball rolling and spearhead the effort but this > is a community effort :)
It's good you started this thread, I had a discussion with Sam Doran (on PTO this week AFIK) who is highly invested in Ansible and motivated to help to have proper playbooks calling tripleo-quickstart-extras roles. One of the ideas that we discussed was to remove toci_gate_* scripts and write Ansible playbooks that call the right modules with the right variables. +1 for an etherpad and start planning this work. > Thanks ! > > [1]: http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/tripleo-ci/tree/zuul.d > > David Moreau Simard > Senior Software Engineer | OpenStack RDO > > dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter] -- 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