On 2017-01-17 02:08 AM, Isaac Beckman wrote:
I think that it would also be a good idea to have the option to let the CI
maintainers add some useful information on the current status.
It is very helpful to know that the CI system is under maintenance which
is the reason why it hasn't been reporting for the last week or so...
Isaac Beckman
Office: +972-3-6897874
Fax: +972-3-6897755
Mobile: +972-50-2680180
Email: [email protected]
IBM XIV, Cloud Storage Solutions (previously HSG)
www.ibm.com/storage/disk/xiv
From: "Jay S. Bryant" <[email protected]>
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<[email protected]>
Date: 16/01/2017 21:56
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Improving Vendor Driver
Discoverability
On 01/16/2017 12:19 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote:
On Jan 16, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Jay S. Bryant
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 01/13/2017 10:29 PM, Mike Perez wrote:
The way validation works is completely up to the project team. In my
research
as shown in the Summit etherpad [5] there's a clear trend in projects
doing
continuous integration for validation. If we wanted to we could also
have the
marketplace give the current CI results, which was also requested in
the
feedback from driver maintainers.
Having the CI results reported would be an interesting experiment. I
wonder if having the results even more publicly reported would result in
more stable CI's. It is a dual edged sword however. Given the instability
of many CI's it could make OpenStack look bad to customers who don't
understand what they are looking at. Just my thoughts on that idea.
That?s very useful feedback. Having that kind of background upfront is
really helpful. As we make updates on the display side, we can take into
account if certain attributes are potentially unreliable or at a higher
risk of showing instability and have the interface better support that
without it looking like everything is failing and a river of red X?s. Are
there other things that might be similar?
Jonathan
Jonathan,
Glad to be of assistance.
I think reporting some percentage of success might be the most accurate
way to report the CI results. Not necessarily flagging it good or bed
but leave it for the consumers to see and compare. Also combine that
with Anita's idea of when the CI last successfully reported and I think
it could give a good barometer for consumers. Our systems all have their
rough times so we need to avoid a 'snapshot in time' view and provide
more of a 'activity over time' view. Third party CI is a good barometer
of community activity and attention, but not always 100% accurate.
Obviously there will need to be some information included with the
results explaining what they are and helping guide interpretations.
Jay
Since the information about system details (contact information, current
status - with the option to fill in as many details as you like on your
individual wikipage) already exists here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems I think it would be
easy to add a link to this wikipage.
Thanks,
Anita.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
