+1 I like that idea. I think it also ties in nicely with both the Monitoring and Tools WGs.
Some projects have a directory called "contrib" that contains contributed items which might not be up to standard. Would that be a simple solution for the "dumping ground"? On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Kris G. Lindgren <klindg...@godaddy.com> wrote: > If we are going to be stringent on formatting – I would also like to see > us be relatively consistent on arguments/env variables that are needed to > make a script run. Some pull in ENV vars, some source a rc file, some just > say already source your rc file to start with, others accept command > options. It would be nice if we had a set of curated scripts that all > worked in a similar fashion. > > Also, to Joe's point. It would be nice if we had two place for scripts. A > "dumping ground" that people could share what they had. And a curated one, > where everything within the curated repo follows a standard set of > conventions/guidelines. > > ___________________________________________________________________ > Kris Lindgren > Senior Linux Systems Engineer > GoDaddy > > From: Joe Topjian > Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 1:43 PM > To: JJ Asghar > Cc: "openstack-operators@lists.openstack.org" > Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] [openstack-operators][osops] Something > other than NOOP in our jenkins tests > > So this will require bash scripts to adhere to bashate before being > accepted? Is it possible to have the check as non-voting? Does this open > the door to having other file types be checked? > > IMHO, it's more important for the OSOps project to foster collaboration > and contributions rather than worry about an accepted style. > > As an example, yesterday's commits used hard-tabs: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/228545/ > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/228534/ > > I think we're going to see a lot of variation of styles coming in. > > I don't want to come off as sounding ignorant or disrespectful to other > projects that have guidelines in place -- I fully understand and respect > those decisions. > > Joe > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:52 PM, JJ Asghar <j...@chef.io> wrote: > >> Awesome! That works! >> >> Best Regards, >> JJ Asghar >> c: 512.619.0722 t: @jjasghar irc: j^2 >> >> On 9/29/15 1:27 PM, Christian Berendt wrote: >> > On 09/29/2015 07:45 PM, JJ Asghar wrote: >> >> So this popped up today[1]. This seems like something that should be >> >> leveraged in our gates/validations? >> > >> > I prepared review requests to enable checks on the gates for >> > >> > * osops-tools-monitoring: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229094/ >> > * osops-tools-generic: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229043/ >> > >> > Christian. >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-operators mailing list >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >> > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators