On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org> wrote: > On 12/03/2015 06:38 AM, John Spray wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> We're working towards getting the devstack/CI parts ready to test the >> forthcoming ceph native driver, and have a question: will a driver be >> accepted into the tree if it has CI for running the api/ tempest >> tests, but not the scenario/ tempest tests? >> >> The context is that because the scenario tests require a client to >> mount the shares, that's a bit more work for a new protocol such as >> cephfs. Naturally we intend to do get that done, but would like to >> know if it will be a blocker in getting the driver in tree. > > > This is not currently a requirement for any of the existing 3rd party > drivers so it wouldn't be fair to enforce it on cephfs. > > It *is* something we would like to require at some point, because just > running the API tests don't really ensure that the driver isn't broken, but > I'm trying to be sensitive to vendors' limited resources and to add CI > requirements gradually. The fact that the current generic driver is unstable > in the gate is a much more serious issue than the fact that some drivers > don't pass scenario tests.
Understood, thanks to you and Valeriy for the clarification. John __________________________________________________________________________ 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
