Re: [Pulp-dev] pulplift with source installs for developers

[Dennis Kliban]

Even though I am a collaborator on the repo, I still don't have the
permissions to transfer it. Eric please initiate the transfer into the the
'pulp' organization on github.

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:13 PM Brian Bouterse  wrote:

> Excellent.
>
> Then unless no objections show up, let's plan on moving this on Wednesday.
> @dkliban can initiate as the admin (granted privs from ehelms), and I can
> configure as a Pulp organization admin.
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:42 PM Robin Chan  wrote:
>
>> No issues with transferring ownership as Eric says he's ready.
>> And target location sounds good.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:06 AM Dana Walker  wrote:
>>
>>> Big shout out to Eric for all the work on pulplift--thank you!
>>>
>>> Dana Walker
>>>
>>> Associate Software Engineer
>>>
>>> Red Hat
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:08 AM Eric Helms  wrote:
>>>
 Ready to transfer! Dennis I sent you a collaborator invite to make you
 an admin to do the transfer.

 On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:08 PM Dennis Kliban 
 wrote:

> I just merged the changes to ansible-pulp3 and the Eric already merged
> the changes to pulplift.
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:00 PM Brian Bouterse 
> wrote:
>
>> I switched to it today, and it's been working well for me. +1 to
>> adopting it as the official dev environment since it consolidates the
>> ansible playbooks into one asset so we can stop maintaining two.
>>
>> When is the right time to move pulplift from @ehelms to the Pulp
>> organization on github?
>>
>
> I'd like this to happen ASAP.
>
>
>> When we do move it can we just land it where we land all the general
>> repos which is the "Pulp Team" group on github?
>>
>
> Yes.
>
>
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:16 AM Dennis Kliban 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for putting this together. After checking out your PRs I was
>>> able to provision a development environment. Everything worked as 
>>> expected.
>>> I'd like to see us switch to these developer environments next week.
>>>
>>> Has anyone else had a chance to try it out?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 6:10 PM Dana Walker 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I have some initial PRs [0][1][2] up for using pulplift to create a
 development environment for pulp3 as described in 4243. [3]  Please 
 take a
 look and provide feedback on any changes we might want to make.  Feel 
 free
 to discuss what we'd like to see here or comment directly on the PRs.

 Note, I haven't added the requirements for building the docs yet,
 so that update will come tomorrow, but I wanted to get this out here 
 and
 start hearing from all of you.

 [0] https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp3/pull/61
 [1] https://github.com/ehelms/pulplift/pull/3
 [2] https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3824
 [3] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4234

 Thanks!

 --Dana

 Dana Walker

 Associate Software Engineer

 Red Hat

 
 


 On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:34 PM Eric Helms 
 wrote:

> The current setup would have each individual configure custom
> boxes to suit their needs. If there was a fairly common setup for 
> location
> of source code and mount options we could update the source boxes or 
> create
> a set of boxes designed for mounting by default to make spinning up 
> easier.
>
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:58 PM Dennis Kliban 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Brian! This looks like exactly what we need.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:54 PM Brian Bouterse <
>> bbout...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> pulplift itself relies heavily on "forklift" which itself has
>>> some good docs. Take a look at these docs and see if it generates 
>>> new
>>> questions.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#using-sshfs-to-share-folders
>>> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#adding-custom-boxes
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:49 PM Dennis Kliban 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We currently use Vagrant directly to create our development
 environment[0]. I would like to be able to use pulplift to create a
 development environment for Pulp 3. Our current Vagrantfile uses 
 SSHFS to
 mount source code on the host onto the vagrant box[1]. This allows
 developers to make changes locally on their laptop and the same 
 code to run
 

Re: [Pulp-dev] pulplift with source installs for developers

[Brian Bouterse]

Excellent.

Then unless no objections show up, let's plan on moving this on Wednesday.
@dkliban can initiate as the admin (granted privs from ehelms), and I can
configure as a Pulp organization admin.

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:42 PM Robin Chan  wrote:

> No issues with transferring ownership as Eric says he's ready.
> And target location sounds good.
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:06 AM Dana Walker  wrote:
>
>> Big shout out to Eric for all the work on pulplift--thank you!
>>
>> Dana Walker
>>
>> Associate Software Engineer
>>
>> Red Hat
>>
>> 
>> 
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:08 AM Eric Helms  wrote:
>>
>>> Ready to transfer! Dennis I sent you a collaborator invite to make you
>>> an admin to do the transfer.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:08 PM Dennis Kliban 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I just merged the changes to ansible-pulp3 and the Eric already merged
 the changes to pulplift.

 On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:00 PM Brian Bouterse 
 wrote:

> I switched to it today, and it's been working well for me. +1 to
> adopting it as the official dev environment since it consolidates the
> ansible playbooks into one asset so we can stop maintaining two.
>
> When is the right time to move pulplift from @ehelms to the Pulp
> organization on github?
>

 I'd like this to happen ASAP.


> When we do move it can we just land it where we land all the general
> repos which is the "Pulp Team" group on github?
>

 Yes.


> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:16 AM Dennis Kliban 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for putting this together. After checking out your PRs I was
>> able to provision a development environment. Everything worked as 
>> expected.
>> I'd like to see us switch to these developer environments next week.
>>
>> Has anyone else had a chance to try it out?
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 6:10 PM Dana Walker 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have some initial PRs [0][1][2] up for using pulplift to create a
>>> development environment for pulp3 as described in 4243. [3]  Please 
>>> take a
>>> look and provide feedback on any changes we might want to make.  Feel 
>>> free
>>> to discuss what we'd like to see here or comment directly on the PRs.
>>>
>>> Note, I haven't added the requirements for building the docs yet, so
>>> that update will come tomorrow, but I wanted to get this out here and 
>>> start
>>> hearing from all of you.
>>>
>>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp3/pull/61
>>> [1] https://github.com/ehelms/pulplift/pull/3
>>> [2] https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3824
>>> [3] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4234
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> --Dana
>>>
>>> Dana Walker
>>>
>>> Associate Software Engineer
>>>
>>> Red Hat
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:34 PM Eric Helms  wrote:
>>>
 The current setup would have each individual configure custom boxes
 to suit their needs. If there was a fairly common setup for location of
 source code and mount options we could update the source boxes or 
 create a
 set of boxes designed for mounting by default to make spinning up 
 easier.

 On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:58 PM Dennis Kliban 
 wrote:

> Thanks Brian! This looks like exactly what we need.
>
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:54 PM Brian Bouterse 
> wrote:
>
>> pulplift itself relies heavily on "forklift" which itself has
>> some good docs. Take a look at these docs and see if it generates new
>> questions.
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#using-sshfs-to-share-folders
>> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#adding-custom-boxes
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:49 PM Dennis Kliban 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We currently use Vagrant directly to create our development
>>> environment[0]. I would like to be able to use pulplift to create a
>>> development environment for Pulp 3. Our current Vagrantfile uses 
>>> SSHFS to
>>> mount source code on the host onto the vagrant box[1]. This allows
>>> developers to make changes locally on their laptop and the same 
>>> code to run
>>> inside the vagrant box.
>>>
>>> pulplift already provides boxes named 'pulp3-source-*'. These
>>> boxes use a playbook[2] from ansible-pulp3 repo to perform the
>>> installation. By default, this playbook assumes that the vagrant 
>>> box has
>>> pulp source code at "/home/vagrant/devel/pulp". However,
>>> without the synced folders, the  source code is not there and the 

[Pulp-dev] pulpcore 3.0.0b19 and pulpcore-plugin 0.1.0b17 now available

[David Davis]

The following packages are now available on PyPI:
   - pulpcore 3.0.0b19 [0] with its release notes here [1]
   - pulpcore-plugin 0.1.0b17 [2] with its release notes here [3]

The beta documentation is available here[4].

[0]: https://pypi.org/project/pulpcore/3.0.0b19
[1]: https://docs.pulpproject.org/en/3.0/nightly/release-notes/pulpcore
/3.0.x.html#b19
[2]: https://pypi.org/project/pulpcore-plugin/0.1.0b17/
[3]:
https://docs.pulpproject.org/en/pulpcore-plugin/nightly/release-notes/index.html#b17
[4] https://docs.pulpproject.org/en/3.0/beta/

David
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

[Kersom]

Robin, yeap. Exactly what you described it.

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:22 PM Robin Chan  wrote:

> Great. I withdraw:
> #3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
> developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
> to be involved in #1 agreements.
>
> And to re-iterate and be very clear, Kersom's ", just to communicate QE in
> case of test changes. We already have a system in place on git." looks like
> getting an approved code review from someone in [1].
>
> That works for me and I appreciate the clarifications.
> Robin
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:15 PM David Davis  wrote:
>
>> I agree. I think devs can merge changes to pulp-smash tests in pulp repos
>> but they should get it reviewed by QE before merging--which, as Kersom
>> says, we've been doing.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:11 PM Kersom  wrote:
>>
>>> David, thanks for driving this.
>>>
>>> I agree with your suggestions Robin.
>>>
>>> All currently present on [1] should have commit bit for those repos.
>>>
>>> I think it is fine to the devs to have commit to the test repos, just to
>>> communicate QE in case of test changes. We already have a system in place
>>> on git.
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Robin Chan  wrote:
>>>
 A few suggestions.

 #1. QE good with [1] - you all agree these are the folks with commit
 bit? In other words, you trust each other to do the merge with your own
 agreements of who has expertise and when things are ready - all the 
 details?
 #2. I would suggest we are suggesting QE have commit bit access to the
 specific subdirectories;
   a) pulp_file/pulp_file/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp_file repo)
   b) pulp/pulp_core/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp repo)
 I know this is not enforceable via the GIT settings, but helpful to be
 explicit about as we include this in agreement.
 #3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
 developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
 to be involved in #1 agreements.

 Fully supportive of this effort. I was one of the folks who gave my
 word prior to PUP-6 and see this as making sure the folks have what they
 need to get stuff done and keeping decision making with the folks closest
 to the work (i.e. QE makes decisions about all things QE.)

 Thanks,
 Robin

 On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM David Davis 
 wrote:

> When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository,
> we promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
> repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
> commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.
>
> Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1]
> the commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to
> smash tests:
>
> pulp/pulp
> pulp/pulp_file
>
> I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access
> to their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by
> QE.
>
> Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January
> 30th.
>
> Thanks.
>
> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>
> David
>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
 ___
 Pulp-dev mailing list
 Pulp-dev@redhat.com
 https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

>>>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

[Robin Chan]

Great. I withdraw:
#3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
to be involved in #1 agreements.

And to re-iterate and be very clear, Kersom's ", just to communicate QE in
case of test changes. We already have a system in place on git." looks like
getting an approved code review from someone in [1].

That works for me and I appreciate the clarifications.
Robin


On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:15 PM David Davis  wrote:

> I agree. I think devs can merge changes to pulp-smash tests in pulp repos
> but they should get it reviewed by QE before merging--which, as Kersom
> says, we've been doing.
>
> David
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:11 PM Kersom  wrote:
>
>> David, thanks for driving this.
>>
>> I agree with your suggestions Robin.
>>
>> All currently present on [1] should have commit bit for those repos.
>>
>> I think it is fine to the devs to have commit to the test repos, just to
>> communicate QE in case of test changes. We already have a system in place
>> on git.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Robin Chan  wrote:
>>
>>> A few suggestions.
>>>
>>> #1. QE good with [1] - you all agree these are the folks with commit
>>> bit? In other words, you trust each other to do the merge with your own
>>> agreements of who has expertise and when things are ready - all the details?
>>> #2. I would suggest we are suggesting QE have commit bit access to the
>>> specific subdirectories;
>>>   a) pulp_file/pulp_file/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp_file repo)
>>>   b) pulp/pulp_core/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp repo)
>>> I know this is not enforceable via the GIT settings, but helpful to be
>>> explicit about as we include this in agreement.
>>> #3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
>>> developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
>>> to be involved in #1 agreements.
>>>
>>> Fully supportive of this effort. I was one of the folks who gave my word
>>> prior to PUP-6 and see this as making sure the folks have what they need to
>>> get stuff done and keeping decision making with the folks closest to the
>>> work (i.e. QE makes decisions about all things QE.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Robin
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM David Davis 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository, we
 promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
 repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
 commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.

 Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1]
 the commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to
 smash tests:

 pulp/pulp
 pulp/pulp_file

 I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access
 to their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by
 QE.

 Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January
 30th.

 Thanks.

 [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
 [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe

 David

 ___
 Pulp-dev mailing list
 Pulp-dev@redhat.com
 https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

>>> ___
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

[David Davis]

I agree. I think devs can merge changes to pulp-smash tests in pulp repos
but they should get it reviewed by QE before merging--which, as Kersom
says, we've been doing.

David


On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:11 PM Kersom  wrote:

> David, thanks for driving this.
>
> I agree with your suggestions Robin.
>
> All currently present on [1] should have commit bit for those repos.
>
> I think it is fine to the devs to have commit to the test repos, just to
> communicate QE in case of test changes. We already have a system in place
> on git.
>
> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Robin Chan  wrote:
>
>> A few suggestions.
>>
>> #1. QE good with [1] - you all agree these are the folks with commit bit?
>> In other words, you trust each other to do the merge with your own
>> agreements of who has expertise and when things are ready - all the details?
>> #2. I would suggest we are suggesting QE have commit bit access to the
>> specific subdirectories;
>>   a) pulp_file/pulp_file/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp_file repo)
>>   b) pulp/pulp_core/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp repo)
>> I know this is not enforceable via the GIT settings, but helpful to be
>> explicit about as we include this in agreement.
>> #3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
>> developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
>> to be involved in #1 agreements.
>>
>> Fully supportive of this effort. I was one of the folks who gave my word
>> prior to PUP-6 and see this as making sure the folks have what they need to
>> get stuff done and keeping decision making with the folks closest to the
>> work (i.e. QE makes decisions about all things QE.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM David Davis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository, we
>>> promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
>>> repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
>>> commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.
>>>
>>> Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1]
>>> the commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to
>>> smash tests:
>>>
>>> pulp/pulp
>>> pulp/pulp_file
>>>
>>> I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access to
>>> their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by QE.
>>>
>>> Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January
>>> 30th.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
>>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

[Kersom]

David, thanks for driving this.

I agree with your suggestions Robin.

All currently present on [1] should have commit bit for those repos.

I think it is fine to the devs to have commit to the test repos, just to
communicate QE in case of test changes. We already have a system in place
on git.

[1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe

Thanks,

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Robin Chan  wrote:

> A few suggestions.
>
> #1. QE good with [1] - you all agree these are the folks with commit bit?
> In other words, you trust each other to do the merge with your own
> agreements of who has expertise and when things are ready - all the details?
> #2. I would suggest we are suggesting QE have commit bit access to the
> specific subdirectories;
>   a) pulp_file/pulp_file/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp_file repo)
>   b) pulp/pulp_core/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp repo)
> I know this is not enforceable via the GIT settings, but helpful to be
> explicit about as we include this in agreement.
> #3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
> developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
> to be involved in #1 agreements.
>
> Fully supportive of this effort. I was one of the folks who gave my word
> prior to PUP-6 and see this as making sure the folks have what they need to
> get stuff done and keeping decision making with the folks closest to the
> work (i.e. QE makes decisions about all things QE.)
>
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM David Davis 
> wrote:
>
>> When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository, we
>> promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
>> repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
>> commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.
>>
>> Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1] the
>> commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to smash
>> tests:
>>
>> pulp/pulp
>> pulp/pulp_file
>>
>> I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access to
>> their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by QE.
>>
>> Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January
>> 30th.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>>
>> David
>>
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] pulplift with source installs for developers

[Robin Chan]

No issues with transferring ownership as Eric says he's ready.
And target location sounds good.

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:06 AM Dana Walker  wrote:

> Big shout out to Eric for all the work on pulplift--thank you!
>
> Dana Walker
>
> Associate Software Engineer
>
> Red Hat
>
> 
> 
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:08 AM Eric Helms  wrote:
>
>> Ready to transfer! Dennis I sent you a collaborator invite to make you an
>> admin to do the transfer.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:08 PM Dennis Kliban  wrote:
>>
>>> I just merged the changes to ansible-pulp3 and the Eric already merged
>>> the changes to pulplift.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:00 PM Brian Bouterse 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I switched to it today, and it's been working well for me. +1 to
 adopting it as the official dev environment since it consolidates the
 ansible playbooks into one asset so we can stop maintaining two.

 When is the right time to move pulplift from @ehelms to the Pulp
 organization on github?

>>>
>>> I'd like this to happen ASAP.
>>>
>>>
 When we do move it can we just land it where we land all the general
 repos which is the "Pulp Team" group on github?

>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>
 On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:16 AM Dennis Kliban 
 wrote:

> Thanks for putting this together. After checking out your PRs I was
> able to provision a development environment. Everything worked as 
> expected.
> I'd like to see us switch to these developer environments next week.
>
> Has anyone else had a chance to try it out?
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 6:10 PM Dana Walker 
> wrote:
>
>> I have some initial PRs [0][1][2] up for using pulplift to create a
>> development environment for pulp3 as described in 4243. [3]  Please take 
>> a
>> look and provide feedback on any changes we might want to make.  Feel 
>> free
>> to discuss what we'd like to see here or comment directly on the PRs.
>>
>> Note, I haven't added the requirements for building the docs yet, so
>> that update will come tomorrow, but I wanted to get this out here and 
>> start
>> hearing from all of you.
>>
>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp3/pull/61
>> [1] https://github.com/ehelms/pulplift/pull/3
>> [2] https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3824
>> [3] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4234
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> --Dana
>>
>> Dana Walker
>>
>> Associate Software Engineer
>>
>> Red Hat
>>
>> 
>> 
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:34 PM Eric Helms  wrote:
>>
>>> The current setup would have each individual configure custom boxes
>>> to suit their needs. If there was a fairly common setup for location of
>>> source code and mount options we could update the source boxes or 
>>> create a
>>> set of boxes designed for mounting by default to make spinning up 
>>> easier.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:58 PM Dennis Kliban 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Thanks Brian! This looks like exactly what we need.

 On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:54 PM Brian Bouterse 
 wrote:

> pulplift itself relies heavily on "forklift" which itself has some
> good docs. Take a look at these docs and see if it generates new 
> questions.
>
> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#using-sshfs-to-share-folders
> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#adding-custom-boxes
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:49 PM Dennis Kliban 
> wrote:
>
>> We currently use Vagrant directly to create our development
>> environment[0]. I would like to be able to use pulplift to create a
>> development environment for Pulp 3. Our current Vagrantfile uses 
>> SSHFS to
>> mount source code on the host onto the vagrant box[1]. This allows
>> developers to make changes locally on their laptop and the same code 
>> to run
>> inside the vagrant box.
>>
>> pulplift already provides boxes named 'pulp3-source-*'. These
>> boxes use a playbook[2] from ansible-pulp3 repo to perform the
>> installation. By default, this playbook assumes that the vagrant box 
>> has
>> pulp source code at "/home/vagrant/devel/pulp". However, without
>> the synced folders, the  source code is not there and the install 
>> fails.
>>
>> I would like to extend pulplift to use synced folders for the
>> source install boxes. However, I am not sure where to add such 
>> directives
>> for vagrant.
>>
>> Eric, can you point me in the right direction?
>>
>>
>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/devel/blob/master/Vagrantfile.example
>> 

Re: [Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

[Dana Walker]

+1


Dana Walker

Associate Software Engineer

Red Hat





On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:07 AM Robin Chan  wrote:

> A few suggestions.
>
> #1. QE good with [1] - you all agree these are the folks with commit bit?
> In other words, you trust each other to do the merge with your own
> agreements of who has expertise and when things are ready - all the details?
> #2. I would suggest we are suggesting QE have commit bit access to the
> specific subdirectories;
>   a) pulp_file/pulp_file/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp_file repo)
>   b) pulp/pulp_core/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp repo)
> I know this is not enforceable via the GIT settings, but helpful to be
> explicit about as we include this in agreement.
> #3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
> developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
> to be involved in #1 agreements.
>
> Fully supportive of this effort. I was one of the folks who gave my word
> prior to PUP-6 and see this as making sure the folks have what they need to
> get stuff done and keeping decision making with the folks closest to the
> work (i.e. QE makes decisions about all things QE.)
>
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM David Davis 
> wrote:
>
>> When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository, we
>> promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
>> repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
>> commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.
>>
>> Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1] the
>> commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to smash
>> tests:
>>
>> pulp/pulp
>> pulp/pulp_file
>>
>> I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access to
>> their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by QE.
>>
>> Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January
>> 30th.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
>> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>>
>> David
>>
>> ___
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

[Robin Chan]

A few suggestions.

#1. QE good with [1] - you all agree these are the folks with commit bit?
In other words, you trust each other to do the merge with your own
agreements of who has expertise and when things are ready - all the details?
#2. I would suggest we are suggesting QE have commit bit access to the
specific subdirectories;
  a) pulp_file/pulp_file/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp_file repo)
  b) pulp/pulp_core/tests/functional/ (in pulp/pulp repo)
I know this is not enforceable via the GIT settings, but helpful to be
explicit about as we include this in agreement.
#3. Shall we also agree that those not in [1] - in other words, the
developers give up commit bit for #2. Can still contribute but don't need
to be involved in #1 agreements.

Fully supportive of this effort. I was one of the folks who gave my word
prior to PUP-6 and see this as making sure the folks have what they need to
get stuff done and keeping decision making with the folks closest to the
work (i.e. QE makes decisions about all things QE.)

Thanks,
Robin

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM David Davis  wrote:

> When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository, we
> promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
> repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
> commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.
>
> Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1] the
> commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to smash
> tests:
>
> pulp/pulp
> pulp/pulp_file
>
> I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access to
> their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by QE.
>
> Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January
> 30th.
>
> Thanks.
>
> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
> [1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe
>
> David
>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] pulplift with source installs for developers

[Dana Walker]

Big shout out to Eric for all the work on pulplift--thank you!

Dana Walker

Associate Software Engineer

Red Hat





On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:08 AM Eric Helms  wrote:

> Ready to transfer! Dennis I sent you a collaborator invite to make you an
> admin to do the transfer.
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:08 PM Dennis Kliban  wrote:
>
>> I just merged the changes to ansible-pulp3 and the Eric already merged
>> the changes to pulplift.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:00 PM Brian Bouterse 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I switched to it today, and it's been working well for me. +1 to
>>> adopting it as the official dev environment since it consolidates the
>>> ansible playbooks into one asset so we can stop maintaining two.
>>>
>>> When is the right time to move pulplift from @ehelms to the Pulp
>>> organization on github?
>>>
>>
>> I'd like this to happen ASAP.
>>
>>
>>> When we do move it can we just land it where we land all the general
>>> repos which is the "Pulp Team" group on github?
>>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:16 AM Dennis Kliban 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Thanks for putting this together. After checking out your PRs I was
 able to provision a development environment. Everything worked as expected.
 I'd like to see us switch to these developer environments next week.

 Has anyone else had a chance to try it out?

 On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 6:10 PM Dana Walker  wrote:

> I have some initial PRs [0][1][2] up for using pulplift to create a
> development environment for pulp3 as described in 4243. [3]  Please take a
> look and provide feedback on any changes we might want to make.  Feel free
> to discuss what we'd like to see here or comment directly on the PRs.
>
> Note, I haven't added the requirements for building the docs yet, so
> that update will come tomorrow, but I wanted to get this out here and 
> start
> hearing from all of you.
>
> [0] https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp3/pull/61
> [1] https://github.com/ehelms/pulplift/pull/3
> [2] https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3824
> [3] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4234
>
> Thanks!
>
> --Dana
>
> Dana Walker
>
> Associate Software Engineer
>
> Red Hat
>
> 
> 
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:34 PM Eric Helms  wrote:
>
>> The current setup would have each individual configure custom boxes
>> to suit their needs. If there was a fairly common setup for location of
>> source code and mount options we could update the source boxes or create 
>> a
>> set of boxes designed for mounting by default to make spinning up easier.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:58 PM Dennis Kliban 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Brian! This looks like exactly what we need.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:54 PM Brian Bouterse 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 pulplift itself relies heavily on "forklift" which itself has some
 good docs. Take a look at these docs and see if it generates new 
 questions.

 https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#using-sshfs-to-share-folders
 https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#adding-custom-boxes


 On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:49 PM Dennis Kliban 
 wrote:

> We currently use Vagrant directly to create our development
> environment[0]. I would like to be able to use pulplift to create a
> development environment for Pulp 3. Our current Vagrantfile uses 
> SSHFS to
> mount source code on the host onto the vagrant box[1]. This allows
> developers to make changes locally on their laptop and the same code 
> to run
> inside the vagrant box.
>
> pulplift already provides boxes named 'pulp3-source-*'. These
> boxes use a playbook[2] from ansible-pulp3 repo to perform the
> installation. By default, this playbook assumes that the vagrant box 
> has
> pulp source code at "/home/vagrant/devel/pulp". However, without
> the synced folders, the  source code is not there and the install 
> fails.
>
> I would like to extend pulplift to use synced folders for the
> source install boxes. However, I am not sure where to add such 
> directives
> for vagrant.
>
> Eric, can you point me in the right direction?
>
>
> [0] https://github.com/pulp/devel/blob/master/Vagrantfile.example
> [1]
> https://github.com/pulp/devel/blob/master/Vagrantfile.example#L8
> [2]
> https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp3/blob/master/source-install.yml
>
> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> 

[Pulp-dev] QE commit bit

[David Davis]

When we moved the pulp-smash tests out of the pulp-smash repository, we
promised to give QE ownership of the smash tests within the Pulp
repositories on github. I know we have a process in place to give the
commit bit to contributors[0] but this promise predates PUP-6.

Thus, I'd like to ask for feedback on giving the QE team in github[1] the
commit bit to the following repositories in order to merge changes to smash
tests:

pulp/pulp
pulp/pulp_file

I'd also like to ask plugin teams to consider giving QE commit access to
their repositories if they have pulp-smash tests that are maintained by QE.

Feedback would be appreciated. I'll like to set an deadline of January 30th.

Thanks.

[0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0006.md
[1] https://github.com/orgs/pulp/teams/qe

David
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] pulplift with source installs for developers

[Eric Helms]

Ready to transfer! Dennis I sent you a collaborator invite to make you an
admin to do the transfer.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:08 PM Dennis Kliban  wrote:

> I just merged the changes to ansible-pulp3 and the Eric already merged the
> changes to pulplift.
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:00 PM Brian Bouterse 
> wrote:
>
>> I switched to it today, and it's been working well for me. +1 to adopting
>> it as the official dev environment since it consolidates the ansible
>> playbooks into one asset so we can stop maintaining two.
>>
>> When is the right time to move pulplift from @ehelms to the Pulp
>> organization on github?
>>
>
> I'd like this to happen ASAP.
>
>
>> When we do move it can we just land it where we land all the general
>> repos which is the "Pulp Team" group on github?
>>
>
> Yes.
>
>
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:16 AM Dennis Kliban 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for putting this together. After checking out your PRs I was able
>>> to provision a development environment. Everything worked as expected. I'd
>>> like to see us switch to these developer environments next week.
>>>
>>> Has anyone else had a chance to try it out?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 6:10 PM Dana Walker  wrote:
>>>
 I have some initial PRs [0][1][2] up for using pulplift to create a
 development environment for pulp3 as described in 4243. [3]  Please take a
 look and provide feedback on any changes we might want to make.  Feel free
 to discuss what we'd like to see here or comment directly on the PRs.

 Note, I haven't added the requirements for building the docs yet, so
 that update will come tomorrow, but I wanted to get this out here and start
 hearing from all of you.

 [0] https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp3/pull/61
 [1] https://github.com/ehelms/pulplift/pull/3
 [2] https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3824
 [3] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4234

 Thanks!

 --Dana

 Dana Walker

 Associate Software Engineer

 Red Hat

 
 


 On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:34 PM Eric Helms  wrote:

> The current setup would have each individual configure custom boxes to
> suit their needs. If there was a fairly common setup for location of 
> source
> code and mount options we could update the source boxes or create a set of
> boxes designed for mounting by default to make spinning up easier.
>
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:58 PM Dennis Kliban 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Brian! This looks like exactly what we need.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:54 PM Brian Bouterse 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> pulplift itself relies heavily on "forklift" which itself has some
>>> good docs. Take a look at these docs and see if it generates new 
>>> questions.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#using-sshfs-to-share-folders
>>> https://github.com/theforeman/forklift#adding-custom-boxes
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:49 PM Dennis Kliban 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We currently use Vagrant directly to create our development
 environment[0]. I would like to be able to use pulplift to create a
 development environment for Pulp 3. Our current Vagrantfile uses SSHFS 
 to
 mount source code on the host onto the vagrant box[1]. This allows
 developers to make changes locally on their laptop and the same code 
 to run
 inside the vagrant box.

 pulplift already provides boxes named 'pulp3-source-*'. These boxes
 use a playbook[2] from ansible-pulp3 repo to perform the installation. 
 By
 default, this playbook assumes that the vagrant box has pulp source 
 code at
 "/home/vagrant/devel/pulp". However, without the synced folders,
 the  source code is not there and the install fails.

 I would like to extend pulplift to use synced folders for the
 source install boxes. However, I am not sure where to add such 
 directives
 for vagrant.

 Eric, can you point me in the right direction?


 [0] https://github.com/pulp/devel/blob/master/Vagrantfile.example
 [1]
 https://github.com/pulp/devel/blob/master/Vagrantfile.example#L8
 [2]
 https://github.com/pulp/ansible-pulp3/blob/master/source-install.yml

 ___
 Pulp-dev mailing list
 Pulp-dev@redhat.com
 https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

>>> ___
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
 ___
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com
>>>