Thank you both, I've forwarded this status and vision to the Env &
Stacks crew on today's meeting.
Honza
On 02/16/2015 02:48 PM, Tim Flink wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 14:14:12 +1000
Dan Callaghan <dcall...@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi Honza,
Excerpts from Honza Horak's message of 2015-02-13 00:44 +10:00:
Hi Dan,
I missed your workshop at DevConf unfortunately, but as one of the
members of Env & Stacks Working Group I'm wondering what is the
current status of beaker instance [1], since the wiki page [2]
seems to be quite short.
Is it available for some testing already? Is there any doc how to
use it as I'm ordinary fedora packager (I was not able to log in)?
Tim Flink and the Fedora QA team have been working on deploying
Beaker in Fedora, so they are best able to answer this.
Currently there is no way for regular Fedora contributors to log in,
it's just username+password accounts created by Tim by hand. The plan
is to use mod_auth_openid pointing as FASOpenID with some group
restrictions enforced, but that needed some support on the FASOpenID
side to expose Fedora group info. I guess that will be covered as
part of the Ipsilon upgrade coming sometime soon.
Yeah, it sounds like we'll be using OpenID/Persona for auth and some
form of interface with FAS for group information (the RFE is against
fas, not ipsilion).
There is also an issue with the LC hostname in log URLs which we are
working on.
Yeah, this is ongoing and one of the big blockers to being able to have
a production beaker system. I suspect that we'll be able to handle the
manual administration of accounts for the near future but the
non-resolvable logs (without massaging them, anyways) is our primary
issue.
I'm also not sure what is it's use case actually. Is it generally
providing a virtual machine for any use case or just for some
special type of work?
The initial use case was to run installer tests:
https://bitbucket.org/fedoraqa/fedora-beaker-tests
There has also been some interest in using Beaker to make non-x86
arches available to packagers who might need them temporarily for
porting purposes. That's something we would look at once Beaker is
fully up and running.
The primary use case that we're looking for is the running of test
cases (including the repo linked to above). There are certain task types
which are better left to beaker than to attempt running in Taskotron.
There are also folks inside Red Hat who have tests written for Beaker
and want to open source them so they can be run in Fedora - an added
bonus if we can get everything working well.
I expect Tim will want to discourage the use of Beaker for "just give
me an x86 VM to play with" scenarios, because there are other tools
for that, and Fedora Beaker's hardware pool will be fairly limited.
Yeah, I'm not sure how many resources we'll be giving access to that
way. I'm of the opinion that there are better and more efficient ways
for folks to access the resources they need.
Btw. I'm also thinking about some fedora proposal for being able to
store some arbitrary tests in Fedora (basically some best practices
how to write tests above unit tests; written in anything, including
beakerlib). Is this something you care about or is this something
totally irrelevant for beaker instance?
Yes I think Tim is very interested in the idea of package integration
tests, which may include running jobs in Beaker. I'll let him
elaborate further.
Something very similar is on our longer-term roadmap. The basic idea is
to allow for relatively arbitrary tasks (within reason, anyways) to be
scheduled on the build or dist-git change for a particular package.
However, that kind of functionality is still blocked on other features
(disposable clients, mostly) and I wasn't planning to get too far into
the details until those blockers were overcome.
Tim
_______________________________________________
qa-devel mailing list
qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/qa-devel
