Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is broken

No alert anymore, gate is green. recheck if needed. On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:22 PM Emilien Macchi wrote: > I updated the bugs, and so far we have one alert left: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1801969 > > The patch is in gate, be patient and then we'll be able to +A/recheck > stuff ag

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is broken

I updated the bugs, and so far we have one alert left: https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1801969 The patch is in gate, be patient and then we'll be able to +A/recheck stuff again. On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 7:30 AM Juan Antonio Osorio Robles < jaosor...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello folks, > > >

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is broken

Hello folks, Please do not attempt to merge or recheck patches until we get this sorted out. We are dealing with several issues that have broken all jobs. https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1801769 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1801969 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1802

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][upgrade] New jobs for tripleo Upgrade in the CI.

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 2:10 PM Sofer Athlan-Guyot wrote: > Hi, > > Testing and maintaining a green status for upgrade jobs within the 3h > time limit has proven to be a very difficult job to say the least. > > The net result has been: we don't have anything even touching the > upgrade code in th

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][upgrade] New jobs for tripleo Upgrade in the CI.

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 5:10 AM Sofer Athlan-Guyot wrote: > Hi, > > Testing and maintaining a green status for upgrade jobs within the 3h > time limit has proven to be a very difficult job to say the least. > Indeed > > The net result has been: we don't have anything even touching the > upgrade

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][upgrade] New jobs for tripleo Upgrade in the CI.

Hi, Testing and maintaining a green status for upgrade jobs within the 3h time limit has proven to be a very difficult job to say the least. The net result has been: we don't have anything even touching the upgrade code in the CI. So during Denver PTG it has been decided to give up on running a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] Having more that one queue for gate pipeline at tripleo

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018, at 7:17 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: > > > On 10/11/18 8:53 AM, Felix Enrique Llorente Pastora wrote: > > So for example, I don't see why changes at tripleo-quickstart can be > > reset if tripleo-ui fails, this is the kind of thing that maybe can be > > optimize. > > Because if t

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] Having more that one queue for gate pipeline at tripleo

On 10/11/18 8:53 AM, Felix Enrique Llorente Pastora wrote: So for example, I don't see why changes at tripleo-quickstart can be reset if tripleo-ui fails, this is the kind of thing that maybe can be optimize. Because if two incompatible changes are proposed to tripleo-quickstart and tripleo

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] Having more that one queue for gate pipeline at tripleo

So for example, I don't see why changes at tripleo-quickstart can be reset if tripleo-ui fails, this is the kind of thing that maybe can be optimize. On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 1:17 PM Emilien Macchi wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 10:01 AM Felix Enrique Llorente Pastora < > ellor...@redhat.co

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] Having more that one queue for gate pipeline at tripleo

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 10:01 AM Felix Enrique Llorente Pastora < ellor...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello there, > >After suffering a lot from zuul's tripleo gate piepeline queue reseting > after failures on patches I have ask myself what would happend if we have > more than one queue for gating t

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] Having more that one queue for gate pipeline at tripleo

Hello there, After suffering a lot from zuul's tripleo gate piepeline queue reseting after failures on patches I have ask myself what would happend if we have more than one queue for gating tripleo. After a quick read here https://zuul-ci.org/docs/zuul/user/gating.html, I have found the fol

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is blocked

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:13 PM Wesley Hayutin wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 7:13 PM Alex Schultz wrote: > >> Please do not approve or recheck anything until further notice. We've >> got a few issues that have basically broken all the jobs. >> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/17867

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is blocked

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 7:13 PM Alex Schultz wrote: > Please do not approve or recheck anything until further notice. We've > got a few issues that have basically broken all the jobs. > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1786764 > https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1787226 > https://b

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is blocked

Please do not approve or recheck anything until further notice. We've got a few issues that have basically broken all the jobs. https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1786764 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1787226 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1787244 https://bugs.launchpad.net

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI

On 07/31/2018 04:51 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:41 AM Sagi Shnaidman > wrote: Hi, Martin I see master OVB jobs are passing now [1], please recheck. [1] http://cistatus.tripleo.org/ Things have improved and I see a lot of jo

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] FFE request for QDR integration in TripleO (Was: Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI)

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Pradeep Kilambi wrote: > Hi Alex: > > Can you consider this our FFE for the QDR patches. Its mainly blocked on CI > issues. Half the patches for QDR integration are already merged. The other 3 > referenced need to get merged once CI passes. Please consider this ou

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:41 AM Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > Hi, Martin > > I see master OVB jobs are passing now [1], please recheck. > > [1] http://cistatus.tripleo.org/ > Things have improved and I see a lot of jobs passing however at the same time I see too many jobs failing due to node_failures.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] FFE request for QDR integration in TripleO (Was: Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI)

Hi Alex: Can you consider this our FFE for the QDR patches. Its mainly blocked on CI issues. Half the patches for QDR integration are already merged. The other 3 referenced need to get merged once CI passes. Please consider this out formal request for FFE for QDR integration in tripleo. Cheers, ~

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI

Hi, Martin I see master OVB jobs are passing now [1], please recheck. [1] http://cistatus.tripleo.org/ On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Martin Magr wrote: > Greetings guys, > > it is pretty obvious that RDO CI jobs in TripleO projects are broken > [0]. Once Zuul CI jobs will pass would it b

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][metrics] Stucked in the middle of work because of RDO CI

Greetings guys, it is pretty obvious that RDO CI jobs in TripleO projects are broken [0]. Once Zuul CI jobs will pass would it be possible to have AMQP/collectd patches ([1],[2],[3]) merged please even though the negative result of RDO CI jobs? Half of the patches for this feature is merged and

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] PTG Stein topics

Greetings, Starting to collect thoughts and comments here, https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleoci-ptg-stein Thanks -- Wes Hayutin Associate MANAGER Red Hat w hayu...@redhat.comT: +1919 <+19197544114>4232509 IRC: weshay View my cale

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is down stop workflowing

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: > Check and gate jobs look clear. > More details on a bit. > So for a recap of the last 24 hours or so... Mistral auth problems - https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1777541 - caused by https://review.openstack.org/#/c/574878/ - fixed

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is down stop workflowing

Check and gate jobs look clear. More details on a bit. Thanks Sent from my mobile On Tue, Jun 19, 2018, 07:33 Felix Enrique Llorente Pastora < ellor...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, > >We have the following bugs with fixes that need to land to unblock > check/gate jobs: > >https://bugs.launc

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI is down stop workflowing

Hi, We have the following bugs with fixes that need to land to unblock check/gate jobs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1777451 https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1777616 You can check them out at #tripleo ooolpbot. Please stop workflowing temporally until they get m

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Team Sprint 13 Summary

Greetings, The TripleO CI team has just completed Sprint 13 (5/3 - 05/23). The following is a summary of activities during our sprint. Details on our team structure can be found in the spec [1]. # Sprint 13 Epic (CI Squad): Upgrade Support and Refactoring - Epic Card: https://trello.com/c/cu

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

On 5/23/18 6:49 PM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: Alex, the problem is that you're working and focusing mostly on release specific code like featuresets and some scripts. But tripleo-quickstart(-extras) and tripleo-ci is much *much* more than set of featuresets. Only 10% of the code may be related to

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:20 PM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > >> >> to reduce the impact of a change. From my original reply: >> >> > If there's a high maintenance cost, we haven't properly identified the >> > optimal way to separate functionality between tripleo/quickstart. >> >> IMHO this is a s

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

> to reduce the impact of a change. From my original reply: > > > If there's a high maintenance cost, we haven't properly identified the > optimal way to separate functionality between tripleo/quickstart. > > IMHO this is a side effect of having a whole bunch of roles in a > single repo. oooq-extr

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > Alex, > > the problem is that you're working and focusing mostly on release specific > code like featuresets and some scripts. But tripleo-quickstart(-extras) and > tripleo-ci is much *much* more than set of featuresets. Only 10% of the cod

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

Alex, the problem is that you're working and focusing mostly on release specific code like featuresets and some scripts. But tripleo-quickstart(-extras) and tripleo-ci is much *much* more than set of featuresets. Only 10% of the code may be related to releases and branches, while other 90% is comp

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > Hi, Sergii > > thanks for the question. It's not first time that this topic is raised and > from first view it could seem that branching would help to that sort of > issues. > > Although it's not the case. Tripleo-quickstart(-extras) is part

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

Hi, Sergii thanks for the question. It's not first time that this topic is raised and from first view it could seem that branching would help to that sort of issues. Although it's not the case. Tripleo-quickstart(-extras) is part of CI code, as well as tripleo-ci repo which have never been branch

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

On 5/23/18 2:43 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk wrote: Hi, Looking at [1], I am thinking about the price we paid for not branching tripleo-quickstart. Can we discuss the options to prevent the issues such as [1]? Thank you in advance. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/569830/4 That was only a half

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci][infra] Quickstart Branching

Hi, Looking at [1], I am thinking about the price we paid for not branching tripleo-quickstart. Can we discuss the options to prevent the issues such as [1]? Thank you in advance. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/569830/4 -- Best Regards, Sergii Golovatiuk _

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squads’ Sprint 12 Summary: libvirt-reproducer, python-tempestconf

On 5/9/18 4:24 AM, Matt Young wrote: Greetings, The TripleO squads for CI and Tempest have just completed Sprint 12. The following is a summary of activities during this sprint.   Details on our team structure can be found in the spec [1]. --- # Sprint 12 Epic (CI): Libvirt Reproducer * E

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squads’ Sprint 12 Summary: libvirt-reproducer, python-tempestconf

Greetings, The TripleO squads for CI and Tempest have just completed Sprint 12. The following is a summary of activities during this sprint. Details on our team structure can be found in the spec [1]. --- # Sprint 12 Epic (CI): Libvirt Reproducer * Epic Card: https://trello.com/c/JEGLSVh6/51

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI & Tempest squad planning summary: Sprint 13

Greetings, The TripleO CI & Tempest squads have begun work on Sprint 13. Like most of our sprints these are three weeks long and are planned on a Thursday or Friday (depending on squad) and have a retrospective on Wednesday. Sprint 13 runs from 2018-05-03 thru 2018-05-23. More information regar

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Community Meeting tomorrow (2018-04-24)

Greetings, Tomorrow the CI team will be hosting its weekly Community Meeting. We welcome any/all to join. The meeting is a place to discuss any concerns / questions / issues from the community regarding CI. It will (as usual) be held immediately following the general #tripleo meeting on BlueJean

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][ci][ceph] switching to config-download by default

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:38 AM, James Slagle wrote: > I've pushed up for review a set of patches to switch us over to using > config-download by default: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/config-download-default > > I believe I've come up with the proper series of steps to switch > th

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI & Tempest squad planning summary: Sprint 12

Greetings, The TripleO CI & Tempest squads have begun work on Sprint 12. This is a 3 week sprint. The Ruck & Rover for this sprint are quiquell and panda. ## CI Squad Goals: "As a developer, I want reproduce a multinode CI job on a bare metal host using libvirt" "Enable the same workflows use

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI / Tempest Sprint 11 Summary

Greetings, The TripleO squads for CI and Tempest have just completed Sprint 11. The following is a summary of activities during this sprint. The newly formed Tempest Squad has completed its first sprint. Details on the team structure can be found in the spec [1]. Sprint 11 Epic (CI Squad): Upg

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] use of tags in launchpad bugs

Thanks for the clarifications about official tags. I was the one creating random/non-official tags for tripleo bugs. Although this may be annoying for some people, it helped me while ruckering/rovering CI to open unique bugs and avoid dups for the first time(s). There isn't a standard way of filing

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] use of tags in launchpad bugs

On 5.4.2018 21:04, Alex Schultz wrote: On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: FYI... This is news to me so thanks to Emilien for pointing it out [1]. There are official tags for tripleo launchpad bugs. Personally, I like what I've seen recently with some extra tags as they cou

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] use of tags in launchpad bugs

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: > FYI... > > This is news to me so thanks to Emilien for pointing it out [1]. > There are official tags for tripleo launchpad bugs. Personally, I like what > I've seen recently with some extra tags as they could be helpful in finding > the hi

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] use of tags in launchpad bugs

FYI... This is news to me so thanks to Emilien for pointing it out [1]. There are official tags for tripleo launchpad bugs. Personally, I like what I've seen recently with some extra tags as they could be helpful in finding the history of particular issues. So hypothetically would it be "wrong" t

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][ci][ceph] switching to config-download by default

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:38 AM, James Slagle wrote: > I've pushed up for review a set of patches to switch us over to using > config-download by default: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/config-download-default > > I believe I've come up with the proper series of steps to switch > th

[openstack-dev] [TripleO][ci][ceph] switching to config-download by default

I've pushed up for review a set of patches to switch us over to using config-download by default: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/config-download-default I believe I've come up with the proper series of steps to switch things over. Let me know if you have any feedback or foresee any iss

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] FYI.. the full tempest execution removed from promotion criteria temporarily

Greetings, The upstream packages for master and queens have not been updated in TripleO in 22 days. We have come very close to a package promotion a number of times, but failed for several different reasons. In this latest issue the full tempest job featureset020 was discussed with both Alex and

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

Hi All, Sorry, Late to the party... I have added myself. --- Regards, Sampath On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Adam Spiers wrote: > > Raoul Scarazzini wrote: > >> > >> On 15/03/2018 01:57, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks all

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Adam Spiers wrote: > Raoul Scarazzini wrote: >> >> On 15/03/2018 01:57, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: >>> >>> Thanks all for starting the collaboration on this which is long pending >>> things and we all want to have some start on this. >>> Myself and SamP talked about it

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

Raoul Scarazzini wrote: On 15/03/2018 01:57, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: Thanks all for starting the collaboration on this which is long pending things and we all want to have some start on this. Myself and SamP talked about it during OPS meetup in Tokyo and we talked about below draft plan- - Update

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

On 15/03/2018 01:57, Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > Thanks all for starting the collaboration on this which is long pending > things and we all want to have some start on this. > Myself and SamP talked about it during OPS meetup in Tokyo and we talked > about below draft plan- > - Update the Spec - https:

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

Thanks all for starting the collaboration on this which is long pending things and we all want to have some start on this. Myself and SamP talked about it during OPS meetup in Tokyo and we talked about below draft plan- - Update the Spec - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/443504/. which is almost

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

On 3/8/18 6:44 PM, Raoul Scarazzini wrote: On 08/03/2018 17:03, Adam Spiers wrote: [...] Yes agreed again, this is a strong case for collaboration between the self-healing and QA SIGs.  In Dublin we also discussed the idea of the self-healing and API SIGs collaborating on the related topic of he

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

Raoul Scarazzini wrote: On 08/03/2018 17:03, Adam Spiers wrote: [...] Yes agreed again, this is a strong case for collaboration between the self-healing and QA SIGs.  In Dublin we also discussed the idea of the self-healing and API SIGs collaborating on the related topic of health check APIs.

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

On 08/03/2018 17:03, Adam Spiers wrote: [...] > Yes agreed again, this is a strong case for collaboration between the > self-healing and QA SIGs.  In Dublin we also discussed the idea of the > self-healing and API SIGs collaborating on the related topic of health > check APIs. Guys, thanks a ton f

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

Georg Kunz wrote: Hi Adam, Raoul Scarazzini wrote: In the meantime, I'll check yardstick to see which kind of bridge we can build to avoid reinventing the wheel. Great, thanks! I wish I could immediately help with this, but I haven't had the chance to learn yardstick myself yet. We sho

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

Hi Adam, > Raoul Scarazzini wrote: > >On 06/03/2018 13:27, Adam Spiers wrote: > >> Hi Raoul and all, > >> Sorry for joining this discussion late! > >[...] > >> I do not work on TripleO, but I'm part of the wider OpenStack > >> sub-communities which focus on HA[0] and more recently, > >> self-heal

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA][Eris][LCOO] Validating HA on upstream

Raoul Scarazzini wrote: On 06/03/2018 13:27, Adam Spiers wrote: Hi Raoul and all, Sorry for joining this discussion late! [...] I do not work on TripleO, but I'm part of the wider OpenStack sub-communities which focus on HA[0] and more recently, self-healing[1].  With that hat on, I'd like to

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA] Validating HA on upstream

On 06/03/2018 13:27, Adam Spiers wrote: > Hi Raoul and all, > Sorry for joining this discussion late! [...] > I do not work on TripleO, but I'm part of the wider OpenStack > sub-communities which focus on HA[0] and more recently, > self-healing[1].  With that hat on, I'd like to suggest that maybe

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA][HA] Validating HA on upstream

Hi Raoul and all, Sorry for joining this discussion late! Raoul Scarazzini wrote: TL;DR: we would like to change the way HA is tested upstream to avoid being hitten by evitable bugs that the CI process should discover. Long version: Today HA testing in upstream consist only in verifying that

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA] Validating HA on upstream

On 02/03/2018 15:19, Emilien Macchi wrote: > Talking with clarkb during PTG, we'll need to transform > tripleo-quickstart-utils into a non-forked repo - or move the roles to > an existing repo. But we can't continue to maintain this fork. > Raoul, let us know what you think is best (move repo to Op

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA] Validating HA on upstream

Talking with clarkb during PTG, we'll need to transform tripleo-quickstart-utils into a non-forked repo - or move the roles to an existing repo. But we can't continue to maintain this fork. Raoul, let us know what you think is best (move repo to OpenStack or move modules to an existing upstream re

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA] Validating HA on upstream

On 16/02/2018 15:41, Wesley Hayutin wrote: [...] > Using galaxy is an option however we would need to make sure that galaxy > is proxied across the upstream clouds. > Another option would be to follow the current established pattern of > adding it to the requirements file [1] > Thanks Bogdan, Raoul

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA] Validating HA on upstream

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: > On 2/16/18 2:59 PM, Raoul Scarazzini wrote: > >> On 16/02/2018 10:24, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: >> [...] >> >>> +1 this looks like a perfect fit. Would it be possible to install that >>> tripleo-ha-utils/tripleo-quickstart-utils with ansible-

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA] Validating HA on upstream

On 2/16/18 2:59 PM, Raoul Scarazzini wrote: On 16/02/2018 10:24, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: [...] +1 this looks like a perfect fit. Would it be possible to install that tripleo-ha-utils/tripleo-quickstart-utils with ansible-galaxy, alongside the quickstart, then apply destructive-testing playbooks w

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI][QA] Validating HA on upstream

On 16/02/2018 10:24, Bogdan Dobrelya wrote: [...] > +1 this looks like a perfect fit. Would it be possible to install that > tripleo-ha-utils/tripleo-quickstart-utils with ansible-galaxy, alongside > the quickstart, then apply destructive-testing playbooks with either the > quickstart's static inve

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] Validating HA on upstream

On 2/15/18 8:22 PM, Raoul Scarazzini wrote: TL;DR: we would like to change the way HA is tested upstream to avoid being hitten by evitable bugs that the CI process should discover. Long version: Today HA testing in upstream consist only in verifying that a three controllers setup comes up corre

[openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] Validating HA on upstream

TL;DR: we would like to change the way HA is tested upstream to avoid being hitten by evitable bugs that the CI process should discover. Long version: Today HA testing in upstream consist only in verifying that a three controllers setup comes up correctly and can spawn an instance. That's somethi

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] Which network templates to use in CI (with and without net isolation)?

On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Sagi Shnaidman wrote: > Hi, all > > we have now network templates in tripleo-ci repo[1] and we'd like to move > them to tht repo[2] and to use them from there. They've already been moved from tripleo-ci to tripleo-heat-templates: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/47

[openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] Which network templates to use in CI (with and without net isolation)?

Hi, all we have now network templates in tripleo-ci repo[1] and we'd like to move them to tht repo[2] and to use them from there. We have also default templates defined in overcloud-deploy role[3]. So the question is - which templates should we use and how to configure them? One option for configu

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI promotion blockers

On 2 January 2018 at 16:30, Alex Schultz wrote: > On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Julie Pichon wrote: >> Hi! >> >> On 27 December 2017 at 16:48, Emilien Macchi wrote: >>> - Keystone removed _member_ role management, so we stopped using it >>> (only Member is enough): https://review.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI promotion blockers

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Julie Pichon wrote: > Hi! > > On 27 December 2017 at 16:48, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> - Keystone removed _member_ role management, so we stopped using it >> (only Member is enough): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/529849/ > > There's been so many issues with the de

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI promotion blockers

Hi! On 27 December 2017 at 16:48, Emilien Macchi wrote: > - Keystone removed _member_ role management, so we stopped using it > (only Member is enough): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/529849/ There's been so many issues with the default member role and Horizon over the years, that one got my a

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI promotion blockers

We've got promotion today, thanks Wes & Sagi for your help. On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > Here's an update on what we did the last days after merging these > blockers mentioned in the previous email: > > - Ignore a failing test in tempest (workaround) > https://review.r

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI promotion blockers

Here's an update on what we did the last days after merging these blockers mentioned in the previous email: - Ignore a failing test in tempest (workaround) https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/8/ until https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526647/ is merged. It allowed RDO repos to be consistent aga

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI promotion blockers

Just a heads-up about what we've done the last days to make progress and hopefully get a promotion this week: - Disabling voting on scenario001, 002 and 003. They timeout too much, we haven't figured out why yet but we'll look at it this week and next week. Hopefully we can re-enable voting today

[openstack-dev] [tripleo][ci] log collection in upstream jobs

Greetings, Infra asked the tripleo team to cut down on the logs we're producing upstream. We are using a lot of space on their servers and also it's taking too long to collect the logs themselves. We need to compromise and be flexible here, so I'd like the tripleo-ci and tripleo core to take ano

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Status & Where to find your patch's status in CI

Hey Folks, So the gate queue is quite backed up due to various reasons. If your patch has been approved but you're uncertain of the CI status please, please, please check the dashboard[0] before doing anything. Do not rebase or recheck things currently in a queue somewhere. When you rebase a patc

[openstack-dev] TripleO CI end of sprint status

Hello, On October 10 we came to our first end of sprint using our new team structure [1], and here’s the highlights: TripleO CI Infra meeting notes: - Zuul v3 related patch: - The new Zuul v3 doesn’t have the cirros image cached, so we have a patch to change the tempest i

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Juan Antonio Osorio wrote: > Something that just came to my mind: Another option would be to allocate an > extra IP Address for the undercloud, that would be dedicated to FreeIPA, and > that way we MAY be able to deploy the FreeIPA server in the undercloud. If > f

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squad Meeting Summary (week 35) - better late than never

If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC Place: https://bluejeans.com/4113567798/ Full minutes: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-squad-meeting Here are the topics discussed fro

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

Something that just came to my mind: Another option would be to allocate an extra IP Address for the undercloud, that would be dedicated to FreeIPA, and that way we MAY be able to deploy the FreeIPA server in the undercloud. If folks are OK with this I could experiment on this front. Maybe I could

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, at 07:19 AM, Paul Belanger wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 09:42:45AM -0400, David Moreau Simard wrote: > > Hi, > > > > (cc whom I would at least like to attend) > > > > The PTG would be a great opportunity to talk about CI design/layout > > and how we see things moving f

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Wesley Hayutin wrote: > +1 from me, I'm sure John, Sagi, and Arx are also interested. Yes, of course, I just went with whom I knew were going to the PTG. Anyone else is welcome to join as well ! David Moreau Simard Senior Software Engineer | OpenStack RDO dmsi

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > Yeah, this session would be interesting to do. > Feel free to add it on https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ptg-queens > We need to work on scheduling before the PTG but it would likely > happen between Wednesday and Friday morning. G

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:42 AM, David Moreau Simard wrote: [...] > Can we have a formal session on this scheduled somewhere ? Yeah, this session would be interesting to do. Feel free to add it on https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ptg-queens We need to work on scheduling before the PTG but

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Paul Belanger wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 09:42:45AM -0400, David Moreau Simard wrote: > > Hi, > > > > (cc whom I would at least like to attend) > > > > The PTG would be a great opportunity to talk about CI design/layout > > and how we see things moving forw

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 09:42:45AM -0400, David Moreau Simard wrote: > Hi, > > (cc whom I would at least like to attend) > > The PTG would be a great opportunity to talk about CI design/layout > and how we see things moving forward in TripleO with Zuul v3, upstream > and in review.rdoproject.org.

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:42 AM, David Moreau Simard wrote: > Hi, > > (cc whom I would at least like to attend) > > The PTG would be a great opportunity to talk about CI design/layout > and how we see things moving forward in TripleO with Zuul v3, upstream > and in review.rdoproject.org. > > Can w

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] CI design session at the PTG

Hi, (cc whom I would at least like to attend) The PTG would be a great opportunity to talk about CI design/layout and how we see things moving forward in TripleO with Zuul v3, upstream and in review.rdoproject.org. Can we have a formal session on this scheduled somewhere ? David Moreau Simard S

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Juan Antonio Osorio wrote: > The second option seems like the most viable. Not sure how the TripleO > integration would go though. Care to elaborate on what you had in mind? Trying to reproduce what we did with ceph-ansible and use Mistral to deploy FreeIPA with

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squad Meeting Summary (week 34)

If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC Place: https://bluejeans.com/4113567798/ Full minutes: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-squad-meeting Topics discussed: We talked abou

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Ben Nemec wrote: > > > On 08/21/2017 01:45 AM, Juan Antonio Osorio wrote: > >> The second option seems like the most viable. Not sure how the TripleO >> integration would go though. Care to elaborate on what you had in mind? >> > > I can't remember if we discussed

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

On 08/21/2017 01:45 AM, Juan Antonio Osorio wrote: The second option seems like the most viable. Not sure how the TripleO integration would go though. Care to elaborate on what you had in mind? I can't remember if we discussed this when we were first implementing the ci job, but could FreeIP

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

The second option seems like the most viable. Not sure how the TripleO integration would go though. Care to elaborate on what you had in mind? On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 9:11 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 8:34 AM, Harry Rybacki > wrote: > > Greetings Stackers, > > > > Recentl

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 8:34 AM, Harry Rybacki wrote: > Greetings Stackers, > > Recently, I brought up a discussion around deploying FreeIPA via > TripleO-Quickstart vs TripleO. This is part of a larger discussion > around expanding security related CI coverage for OpenStack. > > A few months back

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squad Meeting Summary (week 33)

If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC Place: https://bluejeans.com/4113567798/ Full minutes: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-squad-meeting Topics discussed: We debated whe

[openstack-dev] [TripleO][CI] FreeIPA Deployment

Greetings Stackers, Recently, I brought up a discussion around deploying FreeIPA via TripleO-Quickstart vs TripleO. This is part of a larger discussion around expanding security related CI coverage for OpenStack. A few months back, I added the ability to deploy FreeIPA via TripleO-Quickstart thro

[openstack-dev] [tripleo] CI Squad Meeting Summary (week 31)

If the topics below interest you and you want to contribute to the discussion, feel free to join the next meeting: Time: Thursdays, 14:30-15:30 UTC Place: https://bluejeans.com/4113567798/ Full minutes: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-ci-squad-meeting There are a lot of people on vaca

  1   2   3   4   >