On 01/12/15 04:19, Derek Higgins wrote:
Hi All,
A few months tripleo switch from its devtest based CI to one that
was based on instack. Before doing this we anticipated disruption in
the ci jobs and removed them from non tripleo projects.
We'd like to investigate adding it back to heat and ironic as
these are the two projects where we find our ci provides the most
value. But we can only do this if the results from the job are treated
as voting.
In the past most of the non tripleo projects tended to ignore the
results from the tripleo job as it wasn't unusual for the job to
broken for days at a time. The thing is, ignoring the results of the
job is the reason (the majority of the time) it was broken in the
first place.
To decrease the number of breakages we are now no longer running
master code for everything (for the non tripleo projects we bump the
versions we use periodically if they are working). I believe with this
model the CI jobs we run have become a lot more reliable, there are
still breakages but far less frequently.
What I proposing is we add at least one of our tripleo jobs back to
both heat and ironic (and other projects associated with them e.g.
clients, ironicinspector etc..), tripleo will switch to running latest
master of those repositories and the cores approving on those projects
should wait for a passing CI jobs before hitting approve. So how do
people feel about doing this? can we give it a go? A couple of people
have already expressed an interest in doing this but I'd like to make
sure were all in agreement before switching it on.
+1 for heat from me. It sounds like the job won't be voting, but heat
cores should be strongly encouraged to treat it as such.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
