On 08/06/2014 05:48 PM, John Griffith wrote:
I have to agree with Duncan here. I also don't know if I fully
understand the limit in options. Stress test seems like it
could/should be different (again overlap isn't a horrible thing) and I
don't see it as siphoning off resources so not sure of
On 08/11/2014 04:21 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
I apologize for the delay in my response to this thread, between
travelling
and having a stuck 'a' key on my laptop this is the earliest I could
respond.
I opted for a separate branch on this thread to summarize my views and
I'll
respond
Changing subject line to continue thread about new $subj
On 08/12/2014 08:56 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 11, 2014, at 12:00 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com
mailto:dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/06/2014 05:48 PM, John Griffith wrote:
I have to agree with Duncan here. I also don't
On 08/18/2014 04:57 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 06:27:19PM +0200, Marc Koderer wrote:
Hi all,
Am 15.08.2014 um 23:31 schrieb Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com:
I suggest that tempest should be the name of the import'able library, and that the integration
tests themselves
On 08/21/2014 02:39 PM, gordon chung wrote:
The point I've been making is
that by the TC continuing to bless only the Ceilometer project as the
OpenStack Way of Metering, I think we do a disservice to our users by
picking a winner in a space that is clearly still unsettled.
can we avoid
On 08/21/2014 04:12 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from David Kranz's message of 2014-08-21 12:45:05 -0700:
On 08/21/2014 02:39 PM, gordon chung wrote:
The point I've been making is
that by the TC continuing to bless only the Ceilometer project as the
OpenStack Way of Metering, I think we do
On 08/26/2014 10:14 AM, Zane Bitter wrote:
Steve Baker has started the process of moving Heat tests out of the
Tempest repository and into the Heat repository, and we're looking for
some guidance on how they should be packaged in a consistent way.
Apparently there are a few projects already
On 08/26/2014 10:04 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or janitor or secretary, not czar), and side-stepped the offtopic
development (this is not about
On 08/27/2014 02:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
Note: thread intentionally broken, this is really a different topic.
On 08/27/2014 02:30 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 27, 2014, at 1:30 PM, Chris Dent chd...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote:
I have found it immensely
On 08/27/2014 03:43 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 08/27/2014 03:33 PM, David Kranz wrote:
On 08/27/2014 02:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
Note: thread intentionally broken, this is really a different topic.
On 08/27/2014 02:30 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 27, 2014, at 1:30 PM, Chris Dent chd
While reviewing patches for moving response checking to the clients, I
noticed that there are places where client methods do not return any value.
This is usually, but not always, a delete method. IMO, every rest client
method should return at least the response. Some services return just
the
On 08/29/2014 10:56 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 08/29/2014 10:19 AM, David Kranz wrote:
While reviewing patches for moving response checking to the clients, I
noticed that there are places where client methods do not return any value.
This is usually, but not always, a delete method. IMO, every
It's been a while since we had a bug day. We now have 121 NEW bugs:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bugs?field.searchtext=field.status%3Alist=NEWorderby=-importance
The first order of business is to triage these bugs. This is a large
enough number that I hesitate to
mention anything else,
On 09/05/2014 12:10 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 09:42:17AM +1200, Steve Baker wrote:
On 05/09/14 04:51, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 04:32:53PM +0100, Steven Hardy wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 10:45:59AM -0400, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 08/29/2014 05:15
It's been a while since we had a bug day. We now have 121 (now 124) NEW
bugs:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bugs?field.searchtext=field.status%3Alist=NEWorderby=-importance
The first order of business is to triage these bugs. This is a large
enough number that I hesitate to
mention
On 09/11/2014 07:32 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
As you all know, there has recently been several very active discussions
around how to improve assorted aspects of our development process. One idea
that was brought up is to come up with a list of cycle goals/project
priorities for Kilo [0].
To
So we had a Bug Day this week and the results were a bit disappointing
due to lack of participation. We went from 124 New bugs to 75. There
were also many cases where bugs referred to logs that no longer existed.
This suggests that we really need to keep up with bug triage in real
time. Since
On 09/12/2014 05:11 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 03:52:56PM -0400, David Kranz wrote:
So we had a Bug Day this week and the results were a bit disappointing due
to lack of participation. We went from 124 New bugs to 75.
There were also many cases where bugs referred
On 12/10/2013 04:12 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 12/10/2013 04:10 PM, Georgy Okrokvertskhov wrote:
Hi,
In Solum project we are currently creating tests environments for future
test. We split unit tests and functional tests in order to use tempest
framework from the beginning.
Tempest
On 12/10/2013 08:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:43 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com
mailto:dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/09/2013 01:37 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Clark Boylan
clark.boy...@gmail.com
Sorry for lost subject in last message.
Is there a document that describes the api changes from v1 to v2,
similar to the one documenting nova v2 to v3?
-David
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
So it's great to see a submission of savanna tests for tempest. We would
like to see these tests run before reviewing them. Is the intent that
savanna will be enabled by default in devstack? If not, then I guess
there will need to be separate savanna jobs. I see that right now there
are
this was
because I didn't know it was possible to ask all of you like that!
-David
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:33 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com
mailto:dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
Ceilometer team, we are reviewing tempest tests and hope to see
more. The tempest review team is hoping
We like all code submitted to tempest to actually run. Since the neutron
gate jobs are still running only smoke tests, please mark any test that
is added or whose code has changed as smoke. Note that 'smoke' has no
real other meaning now since it was applied haphazardly in the first
place and
On 12/24/2013 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 12/24/2013 01:47 AM, Yair Fried wrote:
Hi,
Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same way
you do your mails in the mailing list
Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack
project we
On 12/27/2013 05:27 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote:
Hello guys!
I hope all of you are enjoying the holidays! But I'd like to raise a
Tempest question. Again. I hope this email will not be lost after
vacations :)
After the summit we decided to track all tests that are being created
for Ceilometer
On 12/28/2013 11:14 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
I think there is a need for an incompatible change review process which
includes more of the community than just those performing the code reviews.
This kind of change can cause a lot of disruption for those of us running
clouds so it is great to see
On 12/29/2013 07:45 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2013-12-29 15:09:24 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote:
[...]
Looking at the docs I see the warning that you can't put this
in the search field so I tried putting it directly in the url like
the other parameters but it was ignored. Is there indeed
In case any one other than me didn't know this, the log files that are
indexed and searchable in logstash are not the same as the set of files
that you see in the logs directory in jenkins, but only those that have
an entry in
On 12/27/2013 05:27 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote:
Hello guys!
I hope all of you are enjoying the holidays! But I'd like to raise a
Tempest question. Again. I hope this email will not be lost after
vacations :)
After the summit we decided to track all tests that are being created
for Ceilometer
I took a little time to think some more about this and pushed a little
working prototype of some ideas I had
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64733/1.
Comments about the approach are most welcome. Note that I minimized any
refactoring of the existing hierarchy for this prorotype.
-David
On 01/03/2014 08:52 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Tim Bell wrote:
Is there a mechanism to tag changes as being potentially more appropriate for
the more ops related profiles ? I'm thinking more when someone proposes a
change they suspect could have an operations impact, they could highlight this
On 01/06/2014 05:14 AM, Shweta Jain wrote:
Hello there ,
I am working on Tempest and is new to it . while I am using
tempest.config but would like to know is there a way I can use
multiple config files in tempest .
My intention to use the multiple configs is purely for running the
test in
Thanks to all who looked at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64733/.
There were a few minor issues I will address but the biggest one was the
suggestion to run each variation as a separate test case using
testscenarios. After looking into that I see a problem with this use
case. Many of these
On 01/11/2014 05:06 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 01/11/2014 11:38 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
3) (still testing) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/65805/
Right now when tempest runs in the devstack-gate jobs, it runs with
concurrency=4 (run 4 tests at once). Unfortunately, it appears that
this maxes
On 01/12/2014 10:14 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
snip
Last, is a question, is it possible to currently run the full API an build a
json schema for it all? Or to query these validating schemas? We *really*
want that over in tempest, so we can completely drop the manual creation of
negative
A bug was introduced before the holidays that made tempest stop failing
successful builds that have new log ERRORs. We are ready to close that
bug but unfortunately some new ones slipped through as indicated in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+bug/1268730 I just filed. It
would be great
On 01/14/2014 10:37 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 01/13/2014 10:38 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while
there is still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes the XML payload
entirely. It adds complexity to
On 01/15/2014 11:56 AM, Steven Dake wrote:
Hi,
Ken'ichi Omichi submitted a change [1] in devstack to change the
default log level to 1 for libvirt. This results in continual spam to
/var/log/messages in my development system, even after exiting
devstack. The spam looks like:
Jan 14
On 01/16/2014 10:56 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
Hi everyone,
With some recent changes made to Tempest compatibility with nosetests is going
away. We've started using newer features that nose just doesn't support. One
example of this is that we've started using testscenarios and we're planning
On 01/17/2014 09:06 AM, Koderer, Marc wrote:
Hi Julien,
most of the cases in tempest/stress are already covered by exiting tests in /api
or /scenario. The only thing that is missing is the decorator on them.
BTW here is the Etherpad from the summit talk that we had:
On 01/22/2014 03:19 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 01:15 -0500, Yair Fried wrote:
I seem to be unable to convey my point using generalization, so I will give a
specific example:
I would like to have update dns server as an additional network scenario.
Currently I could add it to
On 02/03/2014 07:36 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 02/02/2014 08:33 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On Sun, 2014-02-02 at 07:13 -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
Just noticed this at the end of a successful run:
to work with tempest.
We added first patch that adds base functionality to Rally [3]:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/70131/
At QA meeting I discussed it with David Kranz, as a result we agree that
part of this functionality (tempest.conf generator cloud prepare),
should be implemented inside
I was recently bitten by a case where some defaults in keystone.conf
were not appropriate for real deployment, and our puppet modules were
not providing better values
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1064061. Since there are
hundreds (thousands?) of options across all the services.
I was looking at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/73274/1 which makes it
configurable whether a brute-force cleanup of resources is done after
success. This got my wondering how this should really be done. As admin,
there are some resources that can be cleaned and some that I don't know
how.
On 02/20/2014 05:58 AM, om prakash pandey wrote:
I am not able to run Tempest API tests. The typical ERROR I am getting
is Connection Timed Out.
When checking into the logs I found out that tempest is trying to
access the admin URL which is a private IP for our deployment. Now,
Tempest is
Running this test in tempest requires an ami image triple to be on the
disk where tempest is running in order for the test to upload it. It
would be a lot easier if this test could use a simple image file
instead. That image file could even be obtained from the cloud being
tested while
On 02/20/2014 04:53 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:31 PM, David Kranz wrote:
Running this test in tempest requires an ami image triple to be on the
disk where tempest is running in order for the test to upload it. It
would be a lot easier if this test could use a simple image file
XenServer reported failure on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/73704.
The pointer to the logs should look like a jenkins failure but does not
in two ways. First, there is no console log, with a directory of other
log files next to it. Second, the .gz log files are not set up to be
downloaded
mention 'citrix recheck'. I only
discovered that through a web search. In general, the more we can do to
establish uniformity of reviewer experience across all third-party ci,
the more likely it is that reviewers will examine failures.
-David
From: David
On 03/05/2014 10:25 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 13:31:07 -0500
David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
I think it would be a good time to have at least an initial
discussion about the requirements for theses schemas and where they
will live. The next step in tempest around
There are a number of patches up for review that make various changes to
use six apis instead of Python 2 constructs. While I understand the
desire to get a head start on getting Tempest to run in Python 3, I'm
not sure it makes sense to do this work piecemeal until we are near
ready to
I have recently reviewed a few patches (around testing consoles) that
add new tests whose execution depends on False config options or
introduce new ones that are False by default. The result is that the new
tests do not run in any job. Since we have a policy that there should
only be code in
On 03/13/2014 10:50 AM, Joe Hakim Rahme wrote:
On 10 Mar 2014, at 22:54, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
There are a number of patches up for review that make various changes to use six apis
instead of Python 2 constructs. While I understand the desire to get a head start on getting
On 03/13/2014 04:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 03/13/2014 04:29 PM, David Kranz wrote:
On 03/13/2014 10:50 AM, Joe Hakim Rahme wrote:
On 10 Mar 2014, at 22:54, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
There are a number of patches up for review that make various changes
to use six apis instead
On 03/20/2014 06:15 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 03/20/2014 05:49 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote:
Hi all,
First of all, thanks for your suggestions!
To summarize the discussions here:
1. We are not going to install Mongo (because is's wrong ?)
We are not going to install Mongo not from base
On 03/20/2014 12:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 03/20/2014 11:35 AM, David Kranz wrote:
On 03/20/2014 06:15 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 03/20/2014 05:49 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote:
Hi all,
First of all, thanks for your suggestions!
To summarize the discussions here:
1. We are not going to install
On 03/20/2014 11:05 AM, Solly Ross wrote:
I concur. I suspect people/organizations who are doing CD *probably* won't mind
such a change as much as the people who use the versioned releases will mind
backwards-incompatibility. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doing CD requires a
certain willingness
On 03/20/2014 04:19 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Malini Kamalambal [mailto:malini.kamalam...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:13 PM
'project specific functional testing' in the Marconi context is
treating
Marconi as a complete system,
On 03/21/2014 05:04 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:45:11 -0700
Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote:
I know that our primary delivery mechanism is releases right now, and
so if we decide to revert before this gets into a release, that's
cool. However, I think we need to be
.
There was a related discussion about getting more eyes on changes that
propose to be excepted from the API stability guidelines here
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-January/023254.html
-David
On Mar 21, 2014, at 10:34 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com
mailto:dkr
I was reviewing some ironic changes that are more than a week old and do
not have any reviews from the ironic team. Having at least one review
from the ironic team would be very helpful.
-David
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
very valuable in neutron and I'm sure it would be here as well. I
will certainly ping in #openstack-ironic if there are any specific issues.
-David
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:47 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com
mailto:dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
I was reviewing some ironic changes
On 04/04/2014 07:37 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
An interesting conversation has cropped up over the last few days in -qa
and -infra which I want to bring to the wider OpenStack community. When
discussing the use of Tempest as part of the Defcore validation we came
to an interesting question:
Why does
On 10/11/2013 02:03 PM, Alessandro Pilotti wrote:
On Oct 11, 2013, at 19:29 , Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com
mailto:rbry...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 10/11/2013 12:04 PM, John Griffith wrote:
[... snip ...]
Talking about new community involvements, newcomers are getting very
On 10/11/2013 02:34 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Recently in the TripleO meeting we identified situations where we need
to make it very clear that it is ok to pick up somebody else's patch
and finish it. We are broadly distributed, time-zone-wise, and I know
other teams working on OpenStack projects
Thanks, Steve. I suggested a new directory because we really need to
have more complete tests of the client libs since they are not tied to
particular OpenStack releases and we claim the current libs should work
with older releases. That said, I did not realize the intent was to do
more than
On 10/18/2013 12:17 PM, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
John,
Actually seems like a pretty good suggestion IMO, at least something
worth some investigation and consideration before quickly discounting
it. Rather than that's not what tempest is, maybe it's something
tempest could do. Don't know, not
On 10/18/2013 01:54 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 10/18/2013 11:59 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Steven Hardy sha...@redhat.com
mailto:sha...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
Starting a thread to discuss $subject, as requested in:
On 10/20/2013 03:03 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
On 21 October 2013 07:36, Alex Gaynor alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
There's several issues involved in doing automated regression checking for
benchmarks:
- You need a platform which is stable. Right now all our CI runs on
virtualized instances, and
On 10/22/2013 10:19 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 10/21/2013 10:27 AM, Neal, Phil wrote:
Sean, we currently have a BP out there to investigate basic tempest
integration and I think this might fall under the same umbrella.
Unfortunately I've not been able to free up my development time
for it, but
On 10/23/2013 05:08 PM, Rochelle.Grober wrote:
John Griffith wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net
mailto:s...@dague.net wrote:
On 10/23/2013 10:40 AM, John Griffith wrote:
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 7:38 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net
A patch was submitted with some new tests of this api
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/49778/. I gave a -1 because if a
negative test to shutdown a host fails, a compute node will be shutdown.
The author thinks this test should be part of tempest. My issue was that
we should not have tempest
On 10/25/2013 09:10 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 10/25/2013 08:39 AM, David Kranz wrote:
A patch was submitted with some new tests of this api
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/49778/. I gave a -1 because if a
negative test to shutdown a host fails, a compute node will be shutdown.
The author thinks
On 10/31/2013 10:36 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2013-10-31 22:45:56 + (+), Romain Hardouin wrote:
Adding a message for new comers is a good idea.
I am a new Horizon contributor, some of my fixes have been merged
(thanks to Upstream University :-) and reviewers of course) but I
still
This is a heads up that soon we will be auto-generating the
tempest.conf.sample from the tempest code that uses oslo.config.
Following in the footsteps of nova, this should reduce bugs around
failures to keep the config code and the sample conf file in sync
manually. So when you add a new item
On 11/13/2013 08:30 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
Hi, guys
This is the document for the changes from Nova v2 api to v3:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NovaAPIv2tov3
I will appreciate if anyone can help for review it.
Another problem comes up - how to keep the doc updated. So can we ask
people, who
It was clear at the summit that there is a pressing need for more
scenario tests. A number of folks have volunteered to participate so we
need a way to track progress and avoid duplication. We have not had
great satisfaction using either bugs or blueprints, so Sean and I are
proposing a more
@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] Tracking development of scenario tests
On 11/14/2013 12:24 AM, David Kranz wrote:
1. Developer checks in the zeroth version of a scenario test as work in
progress. It contains a description of the test, and possibly work
items. This will claim
So we are close to being able to start doing this. The current whitelist
is here
https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/master/etc/whitelist.yaml. I
have a find-errors script that watches for successful builds and pulls
out the non-whitelisted errors. For the past few weeks I have been
On 11/19/2013 09:40 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 11/17/2013 09:55 PM, Eugene Nikanorov wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm working on major change to Neutron LBaaS API, obviously it will
break existing tempest API tests for LBaaS.
What would be the right process to deal with this? I guess I can't just
push fixed
tl;dr Soon, perhaps next week, tempest gate jobs will start failing if
there are any ERROR lines in the logs that are not matched by an entry
in https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/master/etc/whitelist.yaml.
There is an exception for neutron because
more work needs to be done there for
On 11/27/2013 12:46 PM, Alan Pevec wrote:
2013/11/27 Sean Dague s...@dague.net:
The problem is you can't really support both iso8601 was dormant for
years, and the revived version isn't compatible with the old version.
So supporting both means basically forking iso8601 and maintaining you
own
In preparing to fail builds with log errors I have been trying to make
things easier for projects by maintaining a whitelist. But these bugs in
ceilometer are coming in so fast that I can't keep up. So I am just
putting .* in the white list for any cases I find before gate failing
is turned
Folks, I understand that the review latency can be too long. We just
added two core reviewers and I am sure we can do better still. But
please, if you feel you must ping some one by name for a review, do so
in #openstack-qa rather than pinging on a private channel. That way
other people might
As mentioned several times on this list,
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/58848/ is in the process of merging.
Once it does, builds will start failing if there are log ERRORs that are
not filtered out by
https://github.com/openstack/tempest/blob/master/etc/whitelist.yaml.
There are too many
So the last two bugs I filed were coming from check builds that were not
merged. It was necessary to look at all builds to get to the point where
gate failing on errors could be turned on. Here is the current
whitelist. If you folks think the .*' entries are no longer needed then
please let me
On 12/02/2013 10:24 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Fri, Nov 29 2013, David Kranz wrote:
In preparing to fail builds with log errors I have been trying to make
things easier for projects by maintaining a whitelist. But these bugs in
ceilometer are coming in so fast that I can't keep up. So I am
On 12/03/2013 09:30 AM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
- Original Message -
On 12/02/2013 10:24 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Fri, Nov 29 2013, David Kranz wrote:
In preparing to fail builds with log errors I have been trying to make
things easier for projects by maintaining a whitelist
On 12/05/2013 07:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 12/05/2013 02:37 AM, Koderer, Marc wrote:
Hi all!
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Kenichi Oomichi [mailto:oomi...@mxs.nes.nec.co.jp]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Dezember 2013 01:37
An: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
On 11/13/2013 06:09 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:52 AM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com
mailto:dkr...@redhat.com wrote:
On 11/13/2013 08:30 AM, Alex Xu wrote:
Hi, guys
This is the document for the changes from Nova v2 api to v3:
https
I have been trying to review all of the nova v3 changes. Many of these
patches have been around for awhile and have not kept up with changes
that were made to the v2 tests after a v2 test file was copied to v3. I
think any one submitting a patch to the nova v2 test code needs to file
a bug
have info for the json dict part, not any changes to the url suffix or
return values. Second, there really needs to be a release note to help
users upgrade their apps from v2 to v3.
-David
---
2013/12/7 David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com:
On 11/13/2013 06:09 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Thu
It's great that tempest tests for ironic have been submitted! I was
reviewing https://review.openstack.org/#/c/48109/ and noticed that the
tests do not actually run. They are skipped because baremetal is not
enabled. This is not terribly surprising but we have had a policy in
tempest to only
While reviewing some specs I noticed that I had put myself down for more
Juno-2 work than is likely to be completed. I suspect this will happen
routinely with many folks. Also, assignees may change. This information
is not really part of the spec at all. Since we are still using
blueprints to
On 06/11/2014 03:50 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 03:17:48PM -0400, David Kranz wrote:
While reviewing some specs I noticed that I had put myself down for more
Juno-2 work than is likely to be completed. I suspect this will happen
routinely with many folks. Also, assignees
Tempest has a number of tests in various services for deleting objects
that mostly return 204. Many, but not all, of these tests go on to check
that the resource was actually deleted but do so in different ways.
Sometimes they go into a timeout loop waiting for a GET on the object to
fail.
On 06/12/2014 05:27 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 06/12/2014 05:17 PM, David Kranz wrote:
Tempest has a number of tests in various services for deleting objects
that mostly return 204. Many, but not all, of these tests go on to check
that the resource was actually deleted but do so in different ways
On 06/13/2014 07:31 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 06/13/2014 02:36 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 22:10 -0400, Dan Prince wrote:
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 08:06 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
We're definitely deep into capacity issues, so it's going to be time to
start making tougher
1 - 100 of 198 matches
Mail list logo
