Hi James, On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:43:58PM -0400, James Slagle wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Michele Baldessari <mich...@acksyn.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:14:24PM -0400, James Slagle wrote: > >> I've proposed: > >> https://review.openstack.org/353019 > >> > >> which makes gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-nonha-multinode-nv and > >> gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv become voting jobs. > > > > definitely +1 for the gate-tripleo-ci-centos-7-undercloud-nv job. > > About the nonha job, I was actually wondering if we should still > > keep any non-ha templates/jobs around now that the New HA architecture > > has landed. I cannot think of any real usage and the NG HA stuff deploys > > fine on 1 controller as well so the "develop on a smaller machine" > > use-case is covered. > > > > Is there any reason/use-case to keep any non-ha templates/jobs around? > > I'd love to remove them, but maybe there are some uses I have not > > thought of ;) > > I personally agree and think that we should consolidate our > development and testing efforts onto the single NG pacemaker > architecture and use that for both for non-HA and HA. > > That being said, this needs to be driven via tripleo-heat-templates, > tripleoclient, etc, instead of from the tripleo-ci side. E.g., once > environments/puppet-pacemaker.yaml is the default environment in > tripleo-heat-templates, then tripleo-ci will be using it automatically > for nonha.
Ack. Sounds like a plan. I shall look into it. Kind regards, Michele -- Michele Baldessari <mich...@acksyn.org> C2A5 9DA3 9961 4FFB E01B D0BC DDD4 DCCB 7515 5C6D __________________________________________________________________________ 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