On 06/16/2017 10:46 AM, Eric Harney wrote: > On 06/16/2017 10:21 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: >> >> I don't think merging tests that are showing failures, then blacklisting >> them, is the right approach. And as Eric points out, this isn't >> necessarily just a failure with Ceph. There is a legitimate logical >> issue with what this particular test is doing. >> >> But in general, to get back to some of the earlier points, I don't think >> we should be merging tests with known breakages until those breakages >> can be first addressed. >> > > As another example, this was the last round of this, in May: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/332670/ > > which is a new tempest test for a Cinder API that is not supported by > all drivers. The Ceph job failed on the tempest patch, correctly, the > test was merged, then the Ceph jobs broke: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/glance/+bug/1687538 > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/461625/ > > This is really not a sustainable model. > > And this is the _easy_ case, since Ceph jobs run in OpenStack infra and > are easily visible and trackable. I'm not sure what the impact is on > Cinder third-party CI for other drivers.
Ah, so the issue is that gate-tempest-dsvm-full-ceph-plugin-src-glance_store-ubuntu-xenial is Voting, because when the regex was made to stop ceph jobs from voting (which they aren't on Nova, Tempest, Glance, or Cinder), it wasn't applied there. It's also a question about why a library is doing different back end testing through full stack testing, instead of more targeted and controlled behavior. Which I think is probably also less than ideal. Both would be good things to fix. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev