Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

On 03/01/2016 12:21 PM, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > Moreover, having such git ref as a source in our Puppetfile will lead to > the situation when we have UNREPRODUCIBLE build of Fuel project. Each > build may and will result in different code and you will not be able to > tell which one without

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 10:56:04PM +, Andrew Woodward wrote: > Issue: moving to puppet-openstack on master has exposed fuel-library > to breakage and there are many concerns about changes landing that can > break it. > > Alex S. Proposed that we continue the course, and finish setting up >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

Today we had a sync up call and discussed this. To summarize Attendees: Aleksandr Didenko Alex Schultz Andrew Woodward Alexey Shtokolov Bartek Kupidura Bogdan Dobrelya Denis Egorenko Ivan Berezovskiy Kyrylo Galanov Maksim Malchuk Matthew Mosesohn Max Yatsenko Oleg Gelbukh Oleksiy Molchanov Petr

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

On 02/29/2016 11:19 AM, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > Hi Ivan > > Thanks for bringing this up. Frankly, I think that we hurried a little > bit by making our integration with upstream puppet manifests too > continuous. I would suppose that we used a little bit different technique. > > First of all, we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

Aleksandra, Very good point on separating the concerns about integration tests for Fuel as a whole and verifying commits to a single component such as fuel-library. In theory, it could support the right balance between stable CI and up-to-date code, but only if we resolve the two remaining

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

I think we need to address two separate concerns here: 1) smooth integration of puppet-openstack with Fuel master; 2) tests for changes in fuel-library. For 1) we need to build and test Fuel against master of puppet-openstack and treat any integration issues as critical/blocker. And this is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

I think we should also look at the root cause of these CI failures. They are connected with difference in packages and not with manifests or deployment process. So another possible solution is to stay as close as possible to the package sources used by OpenStack Puppet modules CI. For example, we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

Dmitry >I don't think "hurried" is applicable here: the only way to become more >ready to track upstream than we already are is to *start* tracking >upstream. Postponing that leaves us in a Catch-22 situation where we >can't stay in sync with upstream because we're not continuously catching >up

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 01:19:29PM +0300, Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up. Frankly, I think that we hurried a little bit > by making our integration with upstream puppet manifests too continuous. I > would suppose that we used a little bit different technique. I don't think

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

Hi Ivan Thanks for bringing this up. Frankly, I think that we hurried a little bit by making our integration with upstream puppet manifests too continuous. I would suppose that we used a little bit different technique. First of all, we need to have a set of stable Fuel commits against which the

[openstack-dev] [Fuel][Fuel-Library] Fuel CI issues

Hello, Fuelers! Yesterday we've faced an issue which came from puppet-neutron module: LP #1549934 . Fix was prepared very fast: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284882/ (thanks Sergey for this). So, If CI is red on your patch please re-base it on top