Please see below regarding smokestack. I have cc'ed Dan if anyone has
any questions.
Thanks
Gary
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Smokestack
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:37:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dan Prince <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Kotton"<[email protected]>
To: "Dan Prince"<[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 5:21:44 PM
Subject: Smokestack
Hi,
Can you please answer the question below:
<danwent> garyk: can you ask dan prince about the long-term direction
of
the openstack community regarding tempest vs. smokestack?
Tempest and SmokeStack aren't mutually exclusive. SmokeStack in fact uses the Tempest
"smoke tests" for some of its testing (these are tests that are annotated as
being 'smoke' in the code).
The focus of SmokeStack is more on multi-configurational testing with a focus on the
"most important" features. It uses real packages (not source installs), config
management (instead of just shell scripts... although I use shell for setup tasks which
shell is good for). I really see SmokeStack as a good place to test configuration that
might be what I would call realistic (meaning that end users might actually use it). For
Quantum I would have no problem running proprietary hardware/plugins/etc if we had access
to them and then providing the results upstream. SmokeStack isn't a gate... but the
information is still very valuable upstream and it can be reported on merge proposals,
etc.
I suppose another way of saying it is SmokeStack is here to help raise the bar!
Dan
What i've
been told to date is that our efforts should be focused on tempest
(though i'll be grateful for more testing, regardless of platform)
Thanks
Gary
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
