On 06/10/2016 08:41 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-06-10 11:49:12 +0100 (+0100), Miles Gould wrote: >> On 09/06/16 23:21, Jay Faulkner wrote: >>> There was some discussion about whether or not the Ironic grenade job >>> should be in the check pipeline (even as -nv) for grenade, >> >> Not having this would mean that changes to grenade could silently break >> Ironic's CI, right? That sounds really bad. > > That's like saying it's really bad that changes to devstack could > silently break devstack-based jobs for random projects, and so they > should be tested against every one of those jobs. At some point you > have to draw a line between running a reasonably representative > sample and running so many jobs that you'll never be able to merge > another change again (because even very small nondeterministic > failure rates compound to make that impossible at a certain scale).
Nothing should be voting in check in grenade that requires a plugin. I'm fine with a few things in check nv if they are doing something out of the ordinary that we think needs to be kept on top of. I also expect that ironic folks are going to watch for those failures, and say, with -1/+1 CR, when they are legit and when it was off the rails. A non voting job that doesn't have domain experts validating the content regularly with CR means it gets ignored if it fails a bunch. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net __________________________________________________________________________ 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