On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 04:46:28PM +0200, Lance Haig wrote: > Hi Steve, > > I am happy to assist in any way to be honest. > > The backwards compatibility is not always correct as I have seen when > developing our library of templates on Liberty and then trying to deploy it > on Mitaka for example.
Yeah, I guess it's true that there are sometimes deprecated resource interfaces that get removed on upgrade to a new OpenStack version, and that is independent of the HOT version. As we've proven, maintaining these templates has been a challenge given the available resources, so I guess I'm still in favor of not duplicating a bunch of templates, e.g perhaps we could focus on a target of CI testing templates on the current stable release as a first step? > As you guys mentioned in our discussions the Networking example I quoted is > not something you guys can deal with as the source project affects this. > > Unless we can use this exercise to test these and fix them then I am > happier. > > My vision would be to have a set of templates and examples that are tested > regularly against a running OS deployment so that we can make sure the > combinations still run. I am sure we can agree on a way to do this with CICD > so that we test the fetureset. Agreed, getting the approach to testing agreed seems like the first step - FYI we do already have automated scenario tests in the main heat tree that consume templates similar to many of the examples: https://github.com/openstack/heat/tree/master/heat_integrationtests/scenario So, in theory, getting a similar test running on heat_templates should be fairly simple, but getting all the existing templates working is likely to be a bigger challenge. Steve __________________________________________________________________________ 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