Re: [openstack-dev] [QA][Neutron][3rd Party Testing] Methodology for 3rd party

2014-02-04 Thread trinath.soman...@freescale.com
vance -- Trinath Somanchi - B39208 trinath.soman...@freescale.com | extn: 4048 From: Miguel Angel [mailto:miguelan...@ajo.es] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 11:59 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [QA][Neutron][3rd Party Te

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA][Neutron][3rd Party Testing] Methodology for 3rd party

2014-02-04 Thread Miguel Angel
Interesting points here, I agree with Akihiro, some components leave services, and left over settings over the system even when shut down (I know of neutron net namespaces, .. etc..). +1 to Akihiro proposals for a fresh-vm. --- irc: ajo / mangelajo Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo +34 636 52 25 69 skype:

Re: [openstack-dev] [QA][Neutron][3rd Party Testing] Methodology for 3rd party

2014-02-04 Thread Akihiro Motoki
Hi, I think it is better to use a fresh VM to run tests. When running tempest scenario tests, there is a case where some resources can not be cleanup properly. It happens when some test fails of course. I think 10 minutes is not too long. It requires more than 30 minutes until gate jobs on openst

[openstack-dev] [QA][Neutron][3rd Party Testing] Methodology for 3rd party

2014-02-04 Thread Franck Yelles
Hello, I was wondering how everyone was doing 3rd party testing at the moment when it comes to the process. It takes me around 10 minutes for me to do a +1 or -1. my flow is the following: (I only use Jenkins for listening to the "feed") 1) a job is triggered from Jenkins. 2) a VM is booted 3) th