On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 05:01:49AM -0500, prasanna wrote:
On 8 March 2013 22:24, Alex Huang alex.hu...@citrix.com wrote:
I'm going to start off a branch specifically to do BVT on
simulator and devCloud so that we can at least have system vms/vrs
and business logic tested.
Hey Alex -
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 10:42:11AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote:
- I again push that we must use Gerrit to test the code before it
gets merge into the branch but I'll leave that for someone else to do that.
So the first step to getting Gerrit, is for us to agree to using it and
to be able
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Chip Childers
chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 10:42:11AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote:
- I again push that we must use Gerrit to test the code before it
gets merge into the branch but I'll leave that for someone else to do that.
I'd add:
Large scale of our code base
Difficulty of testing at scale without plenty of hardware (which was a problem
stated during incubation proposal)
I'm going to start off a branch specifically to do BVT on simulator and
devCloud so that we can at least have system vms/vrs and business
On 3/8/13 11:30 AM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 08:54:05AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote:
I'd add:
Large scale of our code base
Difficulty of testing at scale without plenty of hardware (which was
a problem
stated during incubation proposal)
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 08:54:05AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote:
I'd add:
Large scale of our code base
Difficulty of testing at scale without plenty of hardware (which was a
problem
stated during incubation
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 03:18:46PM -0500, David Nalley wrote:
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 08:54:05AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote:
I'd
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 02:30:27PM -0500, Chip Childers wrote:
Well, if we want it someone needs to do it. I'm looking at hadoop (as
David suggested) [snip...]
Take a look at Hadoop's contributor guide [1], specifically the
Contributing your work section. Hadoop is using Jira for patch
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 02:30:27PM -0500, Chip Childers wrote:
Well, if we want it someone needs to do it. I'm looking at hadoop (as
David suggested) [snip...]
Take a look at Hadoop's contributor guide [1],
On Mar 8, 2013, at 3:51 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 02:30:27PM -0500, Chip Childers wrote:
Well, if we want it someone needs to do it. I'm looking at hadoop (as
David suggested)
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Mar 8, 2013, at 3:51 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 02:30:27PM -0500, Chip Childers wrote:
Well, if
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:19:19AM +0530, Frank Zhang wrote:
- improve simulator for runtime testability
- customize to model and inject failures
- make a habit of writing tests around bug reports (I started tagging tests
since api_refactoring on JIRA already.
look for the
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com wrote:
On 06/03/13 11:52 PM, Kelven Yang kelven.y...@citrix.com wrote:
First +1 on BVT.
Second, should we consider the idea of having a staging area for people to
check-in? Which is that making master always the
-Original Message-
From: prasanna [mailto:srivatsav.prasa...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Prasanna Santhanam
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 2:53 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] BVT for CloudStack checkins
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:19:19AM +0530
Great to see you kick this off Alex! I have a few ideas for this and
had been looking for help as well ..
I had a draft lying around of an email you sent me long ago about
tiered testing and I think your proposal fits very well on this:
The tl;dr of that conversation was as below
- improve
First +1 on BVT.
Second, should we consider the idea of having a staging area for people to
check-in? Which is that making master always the stable(reasonable) branch
for main development, but whenever people make check-ins, it goes into
staging first, and we have maintainers(could be automatic)
@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] BVT for CloudStack checkins
First +1 on BVT.
Second, should we consider the idea of having a staging area for people to
check-in? Which is that making master always the stable(reasonable) branch
for main development, but whenever people make check-ins
- improve simulator for runtime testability
- customize to model and inject failures
- make a habit of writing tests around bug reports (I started tagging tests
since api_refactoring on JIRA already.
look for the integration-test label)
- make integration testing easier using factories and
On 06/03/13 11:52 PM, Kelven Yang kelven.y...@citrix.com wrote:
First +1 on BVT.
Second, should we consider the idea of having a staging area for people to
check-in? Which is that making master always the stable(reasonable) branch
for main development, but whenever people make check-ins, it
Also with out staging, features developed by non-commiters else where,
even with good code review in place there is always possibility of
regression after feature merge into master.
On 07/03/13 10:41 AM, Murali Reddy murali.re...@citrix.com wrote:
On 06/03/13 11:52 PM, Kelven Yang
these with the existing infra that would be
great.
-Original Message-
From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.y...@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 11:52 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] BVT for CloudStack checkins
First +1 on BVT.
Second, should we consider
Hi All,
As most of you are aware, the master branch keeps getting broken by checkins
for various reasons. Committers need to be more responsible about their
checkins but I don't think we can depend on that happening. There are various
reasons. The most obvious to me is that granting
Message-
From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 10:42 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [PROPOSAL] BVT for CloudStack checkins
Hi All,
As most of you are aware, the master branch keeps getting broken by
checkins for various
sounds like a
joke to me.
-Original Message-
From: Edison Su [mailto:edison...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 11:14 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] BVT for CloudStack checkins
Recently, I read a topic about, why automated test keeping
Sorry, pervious mail is off topic of BVT.
+1 to BVT
-Original Message-
From: Frank Zhang [mailto:frank.zh...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 11:41 AM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] BVT for CloudStack checkins
Many types of designs
For a developer to checkin:
- S/he must writes marvin tests for their feature and add it to
the BVT.
- S/he must run the checkin tests to verify everything works.
+1 to the above suggestions. there has been a lot of breakage on master
recently, this should eliminate it.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Alex Huang alex.hu...@citrix.com wrote:
Hi All,
As most of you are aware, the master branch keeps getting broken by checkins
for various reasons. Committers need to be more responsible about their
checkins but I don't think we can depend on that happening.
27 matches
Mail list logo
