On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote: > On 2014-08-08 09:06:29 -0400 (-0400), Russell Bryant wrote: > [...] >> We've seen several times that building and maintaining 3rd party >> CI is a *lot* of work. > > Building and maintaining *any* CI is a *lot* of work, not the least > of which is the official OpenStack project CI (I believe Monty > mentioned in #openstack-infra last night that our CI is about twice > the size of Travis-CI now, not sure what metric he's comparing there > though). > >> Like you said in [1], doing this in infra's CI would be ideal. I >> think 3rd party should be reserved for when running it in the >> project's infrastructure is not an option for some reason >> (requires proprietary hw or sw, for example). > > Add to the "not an option for some reason" list, software which is > not easily obtainable through typical installation channels (PyPI, > Linux distro-managed package repositories for their LTS/server > releases, et cetera) or which requires gyrations which destabilize > or significantly complicate maintenance of the overall system as > well as reproducibility for developers. It may be possible to work > around some of these concerns via access from multiple locations > coupled with heavy caching, but adding that in for a one-off source > is hard to justify the additional complexity too.
My understanding is that Fedora has a PPA equivalent which ships a "latest and greated" libvirt. So, it would be packages if we went the Fedora route, which should be less work. Michael -- Rackspace Australia _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev