In addition, I'm the one of the folks who are working with the v3-only gates, the main case that we are looking for is when the functional job is working and the the v3-only is not, so everything related to this jobs, you can just ping me on irc. :)
Cheers, Raildo On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 6:27 PM Rodrigo Duarte <[email protected]> wrote: > The function-nv was depending of a first test to be merged =) > > The v3 depends directly on it, the difference is that it passes a flag to > deactivate v2.0 in devstack. > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Steve Martinelli <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Adam Young <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 05/26/2016 11:36 AM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Adam Young <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Some mix of these three tests is almost always failing: >>>> >>>> gate-keystone-dsvm-functional-nv FAILURE in 20m 04s (non-voting) >>>> gate-keystone-dsvm-functional-v3-only-nv FAILURE in 32m 45s (non-voting) >>>> gate-tempest-dsvm-keystone-uwsgi-full-nv FAILURE in 1h 07m 53s >>>> (non-voting) >>>> >>>> >>>> Are we going to keep them running and failing, or boot them? If we are >>>> going to keep them, who is going to commit to fixing them? >>>> >>>> We should not live with broken windows. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> The uwsgi check should be moved to a proper run utilizing >>> mod_proxy_uwsgi. >>> >>> Who wants to own this? I am not fielding demands for uwsgi support >>> mysqlf, and kind of think it is just a novelty, thus would not mind see it >>> going away. If someone really cares, please make yourself known. >>> >> >> Brant has a patch (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/291817/) that adds >> support in devstack to use uwsgi and mod_proxy_http. This is blocked until >> infra moves to Ubuntu Xenial. Once this merges we can propose a patch that >> swaps out the uwsgi job for uwsgi + mod_proxy_http. >> >> >>> >>> >>> The v3 only one is a WIP that a few folks are working on >>> >>> Fair enough. >>> >>> The function-nv one was passing somewhere. I think that one is close. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, it seems to be intermittant. >>> >>> >> These two are actively being worked on. >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: >>> [email protected]?subject:unsubscribehttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: >>> [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >>> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > > -- > Rodrigo Duarte Sousa > Senior Quality Engineer @ Red Hat > MSc in Computer Science > http://rodrigods.com > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
