Hi all -- So first of all kudos to the JOID team for introducing this new technology -- it's an important step forward.
Secondly, obviously it doesn't make sense to run OpenStack tests against something that doesn't implement OpenStack. I'm really worried, however, about "releasing" something that hasn't been tested at all. I know that often we document upstream bugs when tests aren't passing, etc., but not testing at all doesn't seem to be meeting a basic bar we should probably hold ourselves to for scenarios. Perhaps we can call this scenario something like "Experimental" or really point out that it's early days. Or we can continue to work this and put it out in Euphrates. I'd love to talk about this to the media, obviously, but I also want to feel comfortable that we're on solid footing and not overselling. For my own edification, and apologies if this is a naive question, but how does this relate to the OpenRetriever project, which if I understood correctly, is the OPNFV project approved to focus on K8S and container requirements? Cheers, Heather On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jose Lausuch <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > > I tend to agree about running the same set of test cases to all scenarios. > But if the test frameworks are not prepared for a certain technology (like > in this case K8), it doesn’t make sense to execute them. It’s a waste of > time and we know beforehand that it will fail systematically. > > > > We probably need to treat this case as an isolated scenario and define a > different release criteria for it. > > > > For Euphrates, we can think of adding support in Functest/Yardstick for > containers (VIM abstraction layer or similar) but today we don’t have it. > > > > Regards, > > Jose > > > > > > > > *From:* David McBride [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 21, 2017 19:59 PM > *To:* Narinder Gupta; Fatih Degirmenci > *Cc:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV; Heather Kirksey; Tapio Tallgren; Morgan > Richomme ([email protected]); Gaoliang (kubi); Jose Lausuch; > Raymond Paik > *Subject:* [release][danube] K8 scenario testing on Joid > > > > This is a follow-up to a conversation on IRC (opnfv-release) earlier today. > > > > When asked about disabling Functest and Yardstick for the new K8 scenarios > on Joid, I agreed. My reasoning was that I didn't want to delay release of > new and potentially interesting scenarios. I also know that functest and > yardstick testing is not always applicable to every feature or > configuration. In addition, I was aware that the K8 scenarios had > project-specific testing. > > > > My initial thought was that the disabled tests would be documented in the > release notes and that the project would be required to contribute tests to > functest and yardstick for the following release. > > > > Subsequently, after some discussion, I realized that I had made a mistake > and that this is something that the test working group should weigh in on, > at a minimum. > > > > Therefore, please disregard my earlier direction about disabling the > tests. The tests are still required for all scenarios until the test > working group and/or the TSC indicate otherwise. > > > > Let me know if you have any questions. Sorry for the confusion. > > > > David > > > > -- > > *David McBride* > > Release Manager, OPNFV > > Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 > > Email/Google Talk: [email protected] > > Skype: davidjmcbride1 > > IRC: dmcbride > -- *Heather Kirksey* Director, OPNFV Mobile: +1.512.917.7938 Email/Google Talk: [email protected] Skype: HeatherReneeKirksey IRC: HKirksey [image: OPNFV_RGB.png]
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
