On 4 March 2016 at 11:15, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 4 March 2016 at 11:12, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> >>> On 4 March 2016 at 08:50, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> currently we have both py27 and py27-constraints tox targets in neutron >>> repos. For some repos (neutron) they are even executed in both master and >>> stable/liberty gates. TC lately decided that instead of having separate >>> targets for constrained requirements, we want to have constraints applied >>> to default targets (py27, docs, …), unconditionally; we also want to use >>> those ‘default’ targets in gate; and we also want to eventually get rid of >>> those -constraints tox targets. >>> >>> To achieve that, I sent a set of patches spanning neutron, neutron-*aas, >>> and project-config repos: >>> >>> >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:neutron-constraints >>> >>> For the very least, we want to get our mitaka gate switched to ‘default’ >>> (but constrained) tox targets before final release, so that we have a solid >>> foundation in the stable/mitaka branch that would reflect TC desires. >>> >>> Those important patches are (in order of merge): >>> >>> for mitaka: >>> - https://review.openstack.org/286778: makes ‘default’ tox targets >>> constrained; >>> - https://review.openstack.org/286777: switches mitaka gate to using >>> ‘default’ targets; >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288516: cleans up -constraints targets; >>> >>> for liberty: >>> - [not proposed yet; waiting for 286778]: makes ‘default’ tox targets >>> constrained; >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288506: switches branch back to >>> ‘default’ targets; >>> * we probably don’t want to drop old targets since some external users >>> may already rely on them >>> >>> There are also patches to constrain remaining gate jobs (releasenotes, >>> cover) too: >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288517: neutron >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288472: lbaas >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288470: fwaas >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288443: vpnaas >>> >>> ...though those depend on some project-config work: >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288451: releasenotes >>> - https://review.openstack.org/288455: coverage >>> * note those also depend on another patch for zuul-cloner >>> >>> Thanks for attention and reviews, >>> >>> This is mainly a question of timing: when shall we pull the trigger on >>> all of these? I am happy to do it today, but it's already Friday afternoon >>> in some parts of the world and changes span multiple projects… >>> >> >> I would not advice to pull it till Monday. I will revise the patches, >> including gate votes, early on Monday; then once everyone from US timezones >> is online, we may push first pieces in. >> >> In the meantime, it would be great to see it validated by reviewers >> nevertheless. > > > Ack. > > >> >> >> Ihar >> > Ball is in motion.
> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > >
__________________________________________________________________________ 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