Dear TSC Team,

I'd like to ask you for your insight in forwarded thread. Would it be 
possible to discuss on next week's (this Thursday I'm out of office due 
to public holiday in Poland) TSC weekly meeting?
This is also important for me, as such modification of jenkins 
configuration was proposed to be discussed with TSC members anyway by LF 
support 
(https://jira.linuxfoundation.org/servicedesk/customer/portal/2/IT-16833).

Looking forward to hearing from you,
Konrad Bańka

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:        [onap-discuss] [multicloud/k8s][ci-management] Handling 
separate CI test cases with additional gerrit label
Date:   Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:00:43 +0200
From:   Konrad Banka via Lists.Onap.Org <[email protected]>
Reply-To:       [email protected], [email protected]
To:     [email protected]



Hi ONAP Team,

<TL;DR>
We're feeling that we need additional gerrit review label in 
multicloud/k8s project and enable it being linked to jenkins in 
different flow then current one using "Verified" label. Do you think 
it's a good idea to provide such functionality for each jenkins project 
(non-mandatory label), or we should do it for ourselves only?
</TL;DR>

In multicloud/k8s project we have two kind of tests. The first group 
covers unittests and linters, the second one performs integration tests 
between k8splugin and reference k8s deployment. The other difference 
between these two groups of test is stability and time of execution. 
First group is divided into two jobs, each taking few minutes to finish. 
The second one, though, is a single job, that takes ~20 minutes now, but 
this time will soon expand to ~40/50 minutes as more tests will soon be 
included in CI. It is also less stable, as it is more sensitive for 
environment and network issues.

Our issue is that currently, second group of tests is not linked in any 
way to gerrit reviews, but launched periodically each 6hrs 
(https://jenkins.onap.org/job/multicloud-k8s-kud-deployment-master-shell-6hrs/).
 
In order to maximize visibility and usability of these tests, we wanted 
to launch them with typical gerrit-based trigger. It brings some (bigger 
or lesser) issues though:
* This test is time expensive, it delays results of CI tests quite 
noticeably;
* It is also not perfectly stable yet, it often happens to crash on 
environment issues;
* There is also a possibility, that env issues of this test may be 
really problematic when there would be a need to provide some urgent 
hotfixes.

As a solution to mentioned issues, I propose to create additional gerrit 
label in multicloud/k8s project, with non-blocking characteristic (see 
WIP: https://gerrit.onap.org/r/#/c/multicloud/k8s/+/91645/) that would 
be used for separate group of jenkins jobs. In order to use it by 
mentioned jobs, small modification is needed in ci-management jjb job 
(one variable), but also, jenkins global configuration needs to be 
updated with additional gerrit configuration entry (see 
https://jira.linuxfoundation.org/servicedesk/customer/portal/2/IT-16833 
- however I'm not sure if it's visible for other people than requestor).

Because of this global configuration needed, I'm wondering what are your 
thoughts to provide such label for every project. Anyone could reuse it 
if needed in jenkins CI context, but also, in any other way, as label 
configuration (apart from it's name) can be overridden at each project 
level to serve some different functionality (see 
https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/config-labels.html#label_function).
 
The most important advantage of providing such change globally is 
visibility, as ONAP Developers cannot access Jenkins configuration and 
see what labels are currently possible to use with gerrit, so when 
somebody would need to use such functionality in future, one would 
probably reinvent the wheel. It may also enable some flexibility in 
projects that needs it, but can be skipped for those, who don't.

My Question is:
Do you think such addition on global level may be useful, or maybe we 
should stick with our change locally? Maybe you also have some other 
suggestion how to handle our needs in different way? I strongly hope to 
hear some feedback from you.

Best Regards,
Konrad Bańka







-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#5339): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/5339
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/32839681/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to