Awesome, thanks for the update. 15 minutes is more than ok as we've had
gaps of days (weeks?) between updates to fedorapeople.org.

David


On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 9:45 AM Brian Bouterse <[email protected]> wrote:

> The osci.io team is going to try to stand up fixtures.pulproject.org by
> May 15th. I'll post updates here also as I continue to correspond with them.
>
> They will likely use openshift for the hosting which checks for changes
> every 15 minutes, so fixtures.pulproject.org would be a max of 15 minutes
> behind the git repo. I think this is ok since CI and developers both would
> be using locally hosted fixtures and these are more for convenience. If
> anyone feels differently please let us know.
>
> I put some updates on the ticket also https://pulp.plan.io/issues/6638
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:25 PM Brian Bouterse <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I filed this infrastructure ticket https://pulp.plan.io/issues/6638 for
>> fixtures.pulpproject.org and emailed osci.io contacts asking if they are
>> willing to make https://fixtures.pulpproject.org for us. I'll share back
>> to the thread with what they say.
>>
>> Since we're on the topic, I want to share my perspective on our docs
>> examples. When possible, I imagined our docs would try to use "in the wild"
>> examples, e.g. for RPM to use centos syncing instead of from our fixtures.
>> My thinking is it's a more real-world example and users would have an
>> easier time recognizing it as valuable. That may not always be possible
>> though, e.g. pulp_file may not have an "in the wild repo". Just an opinion
>> I wanted to share, feel free to disregard/disagree.
>>
>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:06 AM Ina Panova <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I am also in favour of hosting fixtures.
>>> Eventually we'd also need to update our tests and workflows in the docs
>>> that point to the fedorapeople.orf fixtures.
>>>
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ina Panova
>>> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>>>
>>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>>>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:03 PM David Davis <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree with @ttereshc that having fixtures hosted somewhere provides
>>>> value.
>>>>
>>>> @bmbouter, your proposal sounds like a good idea. Can you see if it's
>>>> feasible this week?
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 3:17 PM Brian Bouterse <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm +1 on stopping the use of fixtures on fedora people (see some
>>>>> reasoning below). I'd like to offer to contact the folks who host other
>>>>> Pulp infrastructure ( https://osci.io/ ) to inquire if they could
>>>>> standup an auto-refreshing container to serve fixtures. This would pull 
>>>>> the
>>>>> container every time it changes, checking every few min, from wherever we
>>>>> publish it to. Maybe we use https://fixtures.pulpproject.org/   What
>>>>> do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's some reasoning about why I believe Pup should discontinue its
>>>>> fedorapeople use for fixtures going forward:
>>>>>
>>>>> * The fedorapeople servers are configured with a Content-Type that
>>>>> incorrectly advertises gzip content as already compressed to cause clients
>>>>> to "auto-unzip". While this is nice for fedorapeople users, it's an
>>>>> issue for Pulp testing because the expected hashes don't match when it is
>>>>> expecting the content as-is, and yet the webserver instructs the client to
>>>>> uncompress it first. They won't change the default so we have to open
>>>>> tickets to have the "pulp portion of fedorapeople's configs" fixed to
>>>>> advertise the content like a normal webserver should. This is further
>>>>> complicated by ...
>>>>>
>>>>> * Very few people have access to it because it's the place where the
>>>>> Pulp2 production bits are hosted. So we probably can't open it up to a
>>>>> broader group. This means that we're architecturally we can't have more
>>>>> people involved. To me this is a concern.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 10:01 AM Mike DePaulo <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> quba42 does have a point: We can publish the fixtures image to quay
>>>>>> (or other registries), but then host it locally like the `pfixtures`
>>>>>> command does.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another option (technology-wise) is to upload to an S3 bucket or
>>>>>> other object storage. It would cost a small amount of $ per month.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Mike
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:30 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I personally prefer to keep fixtures published somewhere,
>>>>>>> fedorapeople or not, doesn't matter.
>>>>>>> It is convenient to refer to in situations which are not related to
>>>>>>> feature development or functional testing:
>>>>>>>  - when one files a redmine issue and provides steps to reproduce
>>>>>>>  - when one works with, say, Katello, or any other related project
>>>>>>> and needs to try/test something quickly
>>>>>>>  - when one tries to help some user remotely and ask to sync this or
>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's not a strong reason, it's just a matter of convenience, in my
>>>>>>> opinion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tanya
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 8:31 AM Quirin Pamp <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have grown used to always running the fixtures container locally
>>>>>>>> in my pulplift boxes using the pfixtures command (essential when 
>>>>>>>> working on
>>>>>>>> new fixtures).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This command could be made a bit more flexible (right now it always
>>>>>>>> runs in the foreground and always uses the latest container image from
>>>>>>>> quay.io), but those would be trivial changes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a result, I personally have no problems with retiring the
>>>>>>>> fixtures on fedorapeople.org completely.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The disadvantage of the approach is that it requires either
>>>>>>>> downloading the (pretty large) fixtures container from quay.io, or
>>>>>>>> building it locally.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Quirin (quba42)
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> on behalf of David Davis <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> *Sent:* 28 April 2020 22:19:23
>>>>>>>> *To:* Pulp-dev <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [Pulp-dev] fedorapeople.org fixtures
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Our Jenkins jobs for Pulp 2 are disabled and that also includes the
>>>>>>>> job that builds the fixtures and publishes them to fedorapeople.org[0].
>>>>>>>> With the new pulp-fixtures container[1], it's less essential that we 
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>> fixtures published somewhere. I think the two options we have are to 
>>>>>>>> either
>>>>>>>> retire the fedorapeople.org fixtures and remove them, or to move
>>>>>>>> where the job runs and possibly the place where they are hosted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [0] https://repos.fedorapeople.org/pulp/pulp/fixtures/
>>>>>>>> [1] https://quay.io/repository/pulp/pulp-fixtures
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike DePaulo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He / Him / His
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Service Reliability Engineer, Pulp
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IM: mikedep333
>>>>>>
>>>>>> GPG: 51745404
>>>>>> <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>
>>>
_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Reply via email to