On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Kaushal M <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd brought up Zuul a long while back. The opinion then was that, > while a gatekeeper is nice, we didn't want to maintain anymore infra > over what we had at the time. We tried to make Jenkins itself do the > work, which hasn't succeeded as well as we hoped. > > With you being dedicated to maintain the infra, this will be a nice > time to revisit/investigate Zuul again.
I'd propose that concerns of maintenance/administration be separated from the value accrued by this move. This approach worked out well during the JJB task. So, a question for Nigel - when you propose Zuul - what is the flow and benefits that you see being available to the project? Have you previously worked with Zuul or, can cite situations where adoption of Zuul has helped? > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Nigel Babu <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> We've had master breaking twice in this week because we of when we run >> regressions and how we merge. I think it's time we officially thought of >> moving >> regressions as a gate controlld by Zuul. And Zuul will do the merge onto >> the correct branch. >> >> This is me throwing the idea about to hear any negative thoughts, before I do >> further investigation. What does everyone think about this? >> >> Note: I've purposefully not CC'd gluster-devel here because I'd rather go to >> the full developer team with a proper plan. >> >> -- >> nigelb -- sankarshan mukhopadhyay <https://about.me/sankarshan.mukhopadhyay> _______________________________________________ Gluster-infra mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-infra
