On 12/10/2013 07:05 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > On 11 December 2013 09:43, David Kranz <dkr...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> So it seems that the code in the submitted tempest tests can run in a >> regular job if devstack is configured to enable ironic, but that this cannot >> be the default. So I propose that we create a regular devstack+ironic job >> that will run in the ironic and tempest gates, and run just the ironic >> tests. When third-party bare-metal results can be reported for ironic, >> tempest can then accept tests that require bare-metal. Does any one have a >> problem with this approach? > > Whats the connection between accepting baremetal tests and third-party > testing? AIUI the criteria for acceptance is 'the thing is incubated > or integrated'.
We also take the general policy of not landing things we've not seen
execute, otherwise we've found we end up with a bunch of non working
tests, because they aren't executed, a refactor happens, they don't get
caught, fail....
So landing additional function means we need some data on it running.
That means either something in infra (ideally, it can be a periodic and
not an every patch sort of thing) though we can also handle that with
something coming back on 3rd party testing.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
