On 20 August 2015 at 03:08, Matt Riedemann <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > After spending a few hours on https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1370590 > I'm annoyed by the fact we don't yet have a CI system for testing libvirt + > LXC.
Bit thank you for raising this one. > At the Juno midcycle in Portland I thought I remember some guy(s) from > Rackspace talking about getting a CI job running, whatever happened with > that? Now you mention it, I remember that. I haven't heard any news about that, let me poke some people. > It seems like we should be able to get this going using community infra, > right? Just need some warm bodies to get the parts together and figure out > which Tempest tests can't be run with that setup - but we have the > hypervisor support matrix to help us out as a starter. +1 > It also seems unfair to require third party CI for libvirt + parallels > (virtuozzo) but we don't have the same requirement for LXC. The original excuse was that it didn't bring much value, as most of the LXC differences were in libvirt. But given the recent bugs that have cropped up, that is totally the wrong call. I think we need to add a log message saying: "LXC support is untested, and will be removed during Mitka if we do not get a CI in place". Following the rules here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix/DeprecationPlan#Specific_Requirements Does that make sense? John PS I must to kick off the "feature classification" push, so we can get discuss that for real at the summit. Really I am looking for folks to help with that, help monitor what bits of the support matrix are actually tested. __________________________________________________________________________ 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
