[Engine-devel] New gerrit flags behavior
Hi everyone! With the latest gerrit upgrade it has become easier to add the propagation of the Code Review and Verified flags when doing a trivial rebase or when no code was changed, so I've enabled those features for all the projects! The change should become effective right away, so let me know if you have any issues. Enjoy! -- David Caro Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Email: dc...@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] ovirt-specs project needed
El vie 10 ene 2014 10:50:52 CET, Sandro Bonazzola escribió: > Hi, > can you please create a new gerrit project named ovirt-specs? > it will contain .spec files for needed packages not provided by downstream > distributions. > It will contain: > - httpcomponents-core (needed by java sdk, missing on CentOS) > - httpcomponents-client (needed by java sdk, missing on CentOS) > > It should contain also jasper server, actually in its own repository and > jboss actually packaged by us but without a git repo for the spec file. > > Thanks, > Maybe we can use the existing releng-tools repo to store the external projects specs that we need, I think that as they are part of the release process they fit well there. -- David Caro Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Email: dc...@redhat.com Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
- Original Message - > From: "Dave Neary" > To: "Itamar Heim" > Cc: "engine-devel" , vdsm-de...@lists.fedorahosted.org > Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2013 12:07:45 PM > Subject: Re: [vdsm] stale gerrit patches > > Hi, > > On 09/23/2013 12:36 PM, Itamar Heim wrote: > > we have some very old gerrit patches. > > I'm for abandoning patches which were not touched over 60 days (to begin > > with, I think the number should actually be lower). > > they can always be re-opened by any interested party post their closure. > > > > i.e., looking at gerrit, the patch list should actually get attention, > > and not be a few worth looking at, with a "lot of old patches" > > I'm coming late to this discussion, but I see that there were some > dissenting views from people who want maintainers to be able to store > "in-progress" patches in Gerrit. > > I am all in favour of treating Gerrit like we treat a bug tracker. If > something is opened in the bug tracker, it should be a bug, an open bug > is something to be fixed or closed, not to be left indefinitely. An open > patch needs to be rejected, reviewed, revised or committed. I don't > think Gerrit is the place for in-progress patches (use private branches > for that). Just point out that you can also use 'drafts' to store those in progress changes: http://gerrit-documentation.googlecode.com/svn/ReleaseNotes/ReleaseNotes-2.3.html#_drafts > > Cheers, > Dave. > > -- > Dave Neary - Community Action and Impact > Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com > Ph: +33 9 50 71 55 62 / Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13 > ___ > vdsm-devel mailing list > vdsm-de...@lists.fedorahosted.org > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel > ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] [vdsm] stale gerrit patches
On Mon 23 Sep 2013 12:36:58 PM CEST, Itamar Heim wrote: > we have some very old gerrit patches. > I'm for abandoning patches which were not touched over 60 days (to > begin with, I think the number should actually be lower). > they can always be re-opened by any interested party post their closure. > > i.e., looking at gerrit, the patch list should actually get attention, > and not be a few worth looking at, with a "lot of old patches" > > thoughts? > > Thanks, >Itamar > ___ > vdsm-devel mailing list > vdsm-de...@lists.fedorahosted.org > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel It might helpful to have a cron-like script that checks the age of the posts and first notifies the sender, the reviewers and the maintainer, and if the patch is not updated in a certain period just abandons it. -- David Caro Red Hat Czech s.r.o. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Tel.: +420 532 294 605 Email: dc...@redhat.com Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic RHT Global #: 82-62605 ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine commits
On Fri 23 Aug 2013 12:19:01 PM CEST, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> From: "David Caro Estevez" >> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" >> Cc: "Eyal Edri" , "engine-devel" , >> "infra" >> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 1:00:38 PM >> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine >> commits >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >>> From: "Alon Bar-Lev" >>> To: "David Caro" >>> Cc: "Eyal Edri" , "engine-devel" >>> , "infra" >>> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 10:45:37 AM >>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine >>> commits >>> >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "David Caro" >>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" >>>> Cc: "Eyal Edri" , "engine-devel" >>>> , "infra" >>>> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 11:16:31 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine >>>> commits >>>> >>>> On 07/20/2013 08:53 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Original Message - >>>>>> From: "Eyal Edri" >>>>>> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" >>>>>> Cc: "infra" , "engine-devel" >>>>>> , >>>>>> "Fabian Deutsch" >>>>>> Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 9:41:56 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for >>>>>> engine >>>>>> commits >>>>>> >>>>>> This change to commit template has nothing to do with CI. >>>>>> it's a change that should reflect updated components relevance to the >>>>>> commit >>>>>> code. >>>>> >>>>> This commit template is mostly invalid, as touching more than one >>>>> 'subsystem' is possible, and has not enough granularity. >>>> >>>> I suggest using a tag at the end with some extra syntax, like: >>>> Components: core, storage, db >>>> Components: all >>>> Components: all, !core, !db >>>> >>>>> >>>>> For example, database change should trigger what? >>>> All the jobs that are tagged for that component (db upgrades I suppose). >>>> And if the changes affect storage components then also storage, if the >>>> changes affect others then those others too. >>>> >>>>> Infra change should trigger what? >>>> The same, all the jobs that are tagged as infra. >>>> >>>>> A change of both user interface and command should trigger what? >>>> All the jobs tagged by user interface and/or command. >>>> >>>>> So you end up with: >>>>> >>>>> userportal: storage: core: db: some message >>>> >>>> As I suggested before, I think it's better if you end with a commit >>>> message like: >>>> >>>>Some message >>>> >>>>Components: userportal, storage, core, db >>>> >>>> Actually it can be easily done with a tag in the gerrit comment instead >>>> of the commit message. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Just to make who happy? >>>> >>>> The developer, the qe, the ci and the infra people. This mechanism is to >>>> avoid running all the tests all the time. Of course there are some times >>>> when all the tests should be run to make sure nothing else changed, but >>>> most times you just need to run part of them to make sure you did not >>>> break something obvious. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> And maybe there are 50 tests of network, and you need only 5 of them >>>>> for >>>>> the specific change, how do you mark it, so now a developer need to >>>>> know >>>>> any test? what if you add one tomorrow which is relevant to a similar >>>>> change? how do you inform the developer that now he needs 6? >>>> >>>> As I said before, what the developer specifies is not a list of tests, >>>> but a list of components, that qe has to map to different sets o
Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine commits
- Original Message - > From: "Alon Bar-Lev" > To: "David Caro" > Cc: "Eyal Edri" , "engine-devel" , > "infra" > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 10:45:37 AM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine > commits > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "David Caro" > > To: "Alon Bar-Lev" > > Cc: "Eyal Edri" , "engine-devel" > > , "infra" > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 11:16:31 AM > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine > > commits > > > > On 07/20/2013 08:53 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > >> From: "Eyal Edri" > > >> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" > > >> Cc: "infra" , "engine-devel" , > > >> "Fabian Deutsch" > > >> Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 9:41:56 PM > > >> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for > > >> engine > > >> commits > > >> > > >> This change to commit template has nothing to do with CI. > > >> it's a change that should reflect updated components relevance to the > > >> commit > > >> code. > > > > > > This commit template is mostly invalid, as touching more than one > > > 'subsystem' is possible, and has not enough granularity. > > > > I suggest using a tag at the end with some extra syntax, like: > > Components: core, storage, db > > Components: all > > Components: all, !core, !db > > > > > > > > For example, database change should trigger what? > > All the jobs that are tagged for that component (db upgrades I suppose). > > And if the changes affect storage components then also storage, if the > > changes affect others then those others too. > > > > > Infra change should trigger what? > > The same, all the jobs that are tagged as infra. > > > > > A change of both user interface and command should trigger what? > > All the jobs tagged by user interface and/or command. > > > > > So you end up with: > > > > > > userportal: storage: core: db: some message > > > > As I suggested before, I think it's better if you end with a commit > > message like: > > > >Some message > > > >Components: userportal, storage, core, db > > > > Actually it can be easily done with a tag in the gerrit comment instead > > of the commit message. > > > > > > > > Just to make who happy? > > > > The developer, the qe, the ci and the infra people. This mechanism is to > > avoid running all the tests all the time. Of course there are some times > > when all the tests should be run to make sure nothing else changed, but > > most times you just need to run part of them to make sure you did not > > break something obvious. > > > > > > > > And maybe there are 50 tests of network, and you need only 5 of them for > > > the specific change, how do you mark it, so now a developer need to know > > > any test? what if you add one tomorrow which is relevant to a similar > > > change? how do you inform the developer that now he needs 6? > > > > As I said before, what the developer specifies is not a list of tests, > > but a list of components, that qe has to map to different sets of tests > > that can change with time. So specifying webadmin will run all the tests > > in that group, that might be only one, or 100, and might be > > increasing/decreasing with time transparently for the developer. Adding > > a new component is not common and there's no need to do it so frequently. > > > > > > > > Why should it be the developer responsibility and not the quality > > > ensuring > > > engineer responsibility to determine which tests should run and when? > > > > Of course it's the responsibility of the qe engineer to determine when > > and which tests should be run. But this is meant to be a new tool for > > the developer not a substitute for the full qe tests, so the developer > > can easily make sure that he's changes do not break anything obvious > > before starting the real tests (that will take more time and resources). > > The developer just adds some metadata so the qe engineer can decide > > which tests to run per patch, so it'
Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine commits
short anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. adding a new label with relevant tags for the patch, >>>>>>>>>>>>> called >>>>>>>>>> e.g >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'METADATA: network, rest, virt' >>>>>>>>>>>> Having: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> CI-Tests: xxx >>>>>>>>>>>> CI-Tests: yyy >>>>>>>>>>>> CI-Tests: zzz >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is much better. >>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure we should have CI-Test - as we might use this for >>>>>>>>>> something else >>>>>>>>>>> besides CI. >>>>>>>>>>> Region_of_Interest as Dan suggests sounds better IMHO. >>>>>>>>>> I don't care how this is to be called. >>>>>>>>>> However, I do not think that commit message is the place for >>>>>>>>>> instructing CI to do anything. >>>>>>>>>> Commit message stays for good, it should contain information that >>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>> required a year from now. >>>>>>>>>> It has nothing to do with tests and such. >>>>>>>>> I agree with Alon here that the Ci informations don't belong in >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> commit msg. >>>>>>>>> My opinion is that a testcase should know what it covers. This >>>>>>>>> information from the testcase can then be used by any party to >>>>>>>>> determin >>>>>>>>> if the testcase should be run on a specific commit (which yields >>>>>>>>> informations about the changed paths, files, owner, author, etc >>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>> which might be valuable). >>>>>>>> i think you're missing the point here. >>>>>>>> can you explain how do you propose a test case will know "what it >>>>>>>> covers"? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> let's take an example: >>>>>>>> let's say a new commit comes from ovirt-engine: >>>>>>>> http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/16668/ >>>>>>>> commit msg: "core: Use images instead of volumes at CDA message". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> now you have 1000 test cases (could be system or functional test). >>>>>>>> (let's assume that your infra can't support running 1000 tests per >>>>>>>> patch/commit). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Some of these test suits checks network flow, some virt >>>>>>>> (migration/template >>>>>>>> for e.g), some host install, others storage flows and so on... ). >>>>>>>> you have one repo to clone (ovirt-engine, let's keep vdsm a side >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> min), and to compile the project from for the tests. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> now given this scenario, please explain how will you know which >>>>>>>> test >>>>>>>> from >>>>>>>> the 1000 you have you'll run on it. >>>>>>>> do you believe that according to the author/path/filename you'll >>>>>>>> know >>>>>>>> if >>>>>>>> that patch involves storage or virt scenario? >>>>>>> Hey Eyal, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes - I would at least give it a try to decide automagically what >>>>>>> tests >>>>>>> to run by looking at the change. >>>>>>> The main motivation for this is to not add another things which the >>>>>>> committer needs to take care of and IMO we humans tend to fail (at >>>>>>> some >>>>>>> point) on those boring tasks like adding correct metadata (let it be >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> typo or just not adding the correct testsuites/topis to be run). >>>>>> this process can be fully automatic via gerrit hooks & templates: >>>>>> >>>>>> typos or mistakes can be easily handles by gerrit hooks to help the >>>>>> committer fix the tags. >>>>>> as mentions previously, this logic can be done by the project >>>>>> maintainer >>>>>> and enforced by a template or hook. >>>>>> >>>>>> so for example - if someone writes a patch with patch header >>>>>> "webadmin:" , >>>>>> then the tags he'll get to choose from are only relevant to ui/ux. >>>>>> >>>>>> so the only task a committer will have to do is to verify the default >>>>>> tags >>>>>> are relevant. >>>>>> >>>>>> i don't believe this is too much to ask for, considering the huge >>>>>> benefit >>>>>> that we'll get >>>>>> (stable code, less bugs, less ci breakage, mapping of specific code >>>>>> to >>>>>> relevant topic, statistics.. etc..) >>>>>> >>>>>>> But let's get back to your example. >>>>>>> Basically we can use the path and filename to determin what >>>>>>> testsuite >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> run. >>>>>>> Testsuites could be bound to paths and/or filenames and/or regexes >>>>>>> being >>>>>>> matched against the full filename. >>>>>>> Another approach would be to use a java package dependency tree to >>>>>>> determine which classes are directly and indirectly affected by a >>>>>>> change. This information can then be used to also build a set of >>>>>>> testsuites to be run. For example: >>>>>>> World uses Ocean uses Wale uses Cell - if Wale changes, we'll surely >>>>>>> want to run the testsuites assigned to the classes higher up in the >>>>>>> dependency chain (World and Ocean). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For the concrete example above: Maybe there is a spell checker >>>>>>> testcase >>>>>>> which could be bound to the filename glob pattern *.properties. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> i don't think there's an alternative to a metadata to assist >>>>>>>> mapping >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> patch to a relevant "topic" in the code. >>>>>>>> whether it exists as a git note or a label in the commit, that's >>>>>>>> another >>>>>>>> matter and probably less important. >>>>>>> The idea is to use the path/filename and dependency tree information >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> model these topics. Example: >>>>>>> WaterTestsuite(Topic): >>>>>>>regex_in_change: .*\.fish >>>>>>>glob_in_change: src/classes/ocean/*.java >>>>>>>path_in_change: src/classes/water.java >>>>>>>change_affects_depency_of: WaterClass >>>>>> I'm not familiar that much with the names of the classes and >>>>>> filenames, >>>>>> but >>>>>> it sounds to me like an error prone process >>>>>> and very complex to start going through all the classes and file >>>>>> names >>>>>> and >>>>>> mapping them to a certain project/component. >>>>>> sounds like we'll have to enforce a naming convention for every new >>>>>> file/path/class name that won't break that magic >>>>>> detection. >>>>>> >>>>>> sure there are exceptions that will work probably, like "anything >>>>>> under >>>>>> packaging/, should trigger the 'engine-setup' or 'engine-upgrade' >>>>>> tests, >>>>>> but imo, it is not so easy with other components. >>>>>> >>>>>> if something will help, it will be splitting up ovirt-engine into >>>>>> subject >>>>>> projects (different git) >>>>>> >>>>>> Eyal. >>>>> >>>>> I think some valid points were raised in this thread, and I feel we all >>>>> agree regarding the need for such a mechanism. >>>>> regarding mapping of different areas in the code using metadata, i >>>>> think >>>>> this approach worth trying, it'll increase ownership and area of >>>>> responsibility within our code and hopefully provide us the >>>>> functionality we are looking for. >>>>> we can start doing the obvious mapping, after-which the responsibility >>>>> of each team/maintainer to assign a file to a person and define the >>>>> specific functional areas in it. >>>>> >>>>> Moran. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> But surely labels or meta-data in the commit msg are quicker to >>>>>>> implement. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - fabian >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> eyal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - fabian >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>>> Engine-devel mailing list >>>>>>>>> Engine-devel@ovirt.org >>>>>>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> ___ >>>>>> Infra mailing list >>>>>> in...@ovirt.org >>>>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra >>>>> >>>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Engine-devel mailing list >>>> Engine-devel@ovirt.org >>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel >>>> >>> >> > ___ > Infra mailing list > in...@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra > -- David Caro Red Hat Czech s.r.o. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Tel.: +420 532 294 605 Email: dc...@redhat.com Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic RHT Global #: 82-62605 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
[Engine-devel] ovirt_engine_find_bugs failing
Hi, the ovirt_engine_find_bugs job is failing very likely to a commit you made: http://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-engine.git;a=commitdiff;h=1bf0e9f59e2208215f729cde32b0829152fef219;hp=6f238e7ee3d25fa28e85a55646bbbf739b49ef1f Can you please take a look at it? Thanks! -- David Caro Red Hat Czech s.r.o. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Tel.: +420 532 294 605 Email: dc...@redhat.com Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyn(ova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic RHT Global #: 82-62605 ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
