Hi again Jon Paul,
My mistake! This seems to be exactly what I was looking for, thank you. (I
goofed the query which is why I thought it was lacking.)
Cheers :)
-Luke
On 10 July 2014 09:17, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> On 9 July 2014 20:24, Sullivan, Jon Paul wrote:
>
>>Incidentally, is there a
For log storage I would definitely start with compression since these are
just plain text. Make sure you enable gzip decompression in your web server
software so people can still view the log files in their browser.
Before spending tons of disk space on log storage, I would also have it
purge logs
If I understand correctly, you are having it comment when there is a
retrigger due to an internal CI failure? If so, please don't do this
because it makes the Gerrit reviews very noisy and it provides nothing
relevant to the contributor submitting the patch.
Nobody wants a CI to report that it has
On 10 July 2014 10:06, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> The main new feature now is to automatically retrigger events that neither
> definitely succeed (exit status 100) nor definitely fail (exit status 101).
> In this case the CI will vote "0" with the logs and then automatically
> schedule a new test, up t
Howdy!
I've been operating a shellci for a while now and overall it is very smooth.
The main new feature now is to automatically retrigger events that neither
definitely succeed (exit status 100) nor definitely fail (exit status 101).
In this case the CI will vote "0" with the logs and then autom
On 9 July 2014 20:24, Sullivan, Jon Paul wrote:
>Incidentally, is there already way to review what votes my CI (or
> indeed anybody's) is casting via an openstack.org web interface?
>
>
>
> >>> You can look at the individual account dashboards in Gerrit, like:
> https://review.openstack.org/#
From: Luke Gorrie [mailto:l...@snabb.co]
Sent: 07 July 2014 10:54
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][third-party] Simple and robust CI script?
On 7 July 2014 11:41, Luke Gorrie mailto:l...@snabb.co>> wrote:
I'm
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 4:41 AM, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> On 3 July 2014 19:05, Luke Gorrie wrote:
>>
>> Time to make it start running real tempest tests.
>
>
> Howdy!
>
> shellci now supports running parallel build processes and by default
> runs each test with devstack+tempest in a one-shot Vagrant
On 7 July 2014 11:41, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> I'm running an additional non-voting instance that runs five parallel
> builds and triggers on all OpenStack projects.
>
To clarify: by "non-voting" I mean not posting any results to
review.openstack.org at all, to avoid noise. (Posting comments is only
On 3 July 2014 19:05, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> Time to make it start running real tempest tests.
>
Howdy!
shellci now supports running parallel build processes and by default
runs each test with devstack+tempest in a one-shot Vagrant VM.
The README is updated on Github: https://github.com/SnabbCo
On 1 July 2014 19:12, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> It does not yet run devstack/tempest and I hope to reuse that part from
> somebody else's efforts.
>
shellci is happily voting on the sandbox with the Snabb NFV CI account so
far: http://egg.snabb.co:81/shellci/shellci.log
Time to make it start running
Howdy!
I wrote a new version of shellci today and have it up and running and
voting on the sandbox.
It's described on the Github page: https://github.com/SnabbCo/shellci
Currently this is simple shell scripts to receive review.openstack.org
gerrit events, run tests and determine results, then po
I have a really early sketch of this project on Github now.
shellci - OpenStack 3rd party CI in 100 lines of shell
https://github.com/SnabbCo/shellci
This is not finished yet but I'll try to use it for the new Neutron mech
driver that I want to contribute to Juno.
Ideas and encouragement welcome
On 30 June 2014 19:37, Asselin, Ramy wrote:
> Not sure if these are “minimalist” but at least they setup
> automagically, so you don’t need to do it from scratch:
>
I'm aiming to do exactly the opposite of this i.e. no automagic.
My experience has been that the really heavy-duty CI setups are
)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][third-party] Simple and robust CI script?
On 30 June 2014 17:34, Kyle Mestery
mailto:mest...@noironetworks.com>> wrote:
It would be great to get you to join the 3rd Party meeting [1] in
#openstack-meeting at 1800UTC to discuss this. Can you make it toda
On 30 June 2014 17:34, Kyle Mestery wrote:
> It would be great to get you to join the 3rd Party meeting [1] in
> #openstack-meeting at 1800UTC to discuss this. Can you make it today
> Luke?
>
Yes, I'll be there.
Currently I'm looking into "the simplest 3rd party CI that could possibly
work" whi
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Luke Gorrie wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> Paging other 3rd party CI operators...
>
> I would like to run a simple and robust 3rd party CI. Simple as in a small
> number of moving parts, robust as in unlikely to make mistakes due to
> unexpected problems.
>
> I'm imagining:
>
Howdy!
Paging other 3rd party CI operators...
I would like to run a simple and robust 3rd party CI. Simple as in a small
number of moving parts, robust as in unlikely to make mistakes due to
unexpected problems.
I'm imagining:
- 100 lines of shell for the implementation.
- Minimum of daemons.
18 matches
Mail list logo