I'd start to with using forklift for bats testing because it's the
easiest and most stand alone action.
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 02:13:16PM +0200, Marek Hulán wrote:
+1 for every suggestion! Which would you like to start with? I'd be interested
in helping with forklift being used in jenkins for running bats tests. Later I
hope with installers merge.
--
Marek
On středa 2. srpna 2017 14:33:44 CEST Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote:
Hello all,
As many of you know we have some overlapping work between Foreman and
Katello. This is an effort to reduce some of this. This is only
focussing on git repositories but once this is in place this should be
easier. It's all proposals and we will need to work out details.
One might notice that much of this has been talked about before but
never reached a conclusion, which is something we tend to do a lot.
Let's break the cycle and make some decisions.
# foreman-bats -> forklift merge
Currently we have foreman-bats[1] and forklift[2] which both include
a vagrant config and bats tests. I'd propose we merge foreman-bats into
forklift and deprecate foreman-bats. Most of bats (if not all) should
already be there so I believe we just need to verify we can test Foreman
using Forklift. Since I added Debian we need to make Ubuntu work and
verify Jenkins can still test everything it used to.
This should be a relative easy task for which a lot of work has already
been done.
Tasks/Challenges I can think of:
* Add Ubuntu to Forklift
* Get bats passing on all supported configs
* Verify foreman-bats is no longer used on CI
* Add a deprecation warning in foreman-bats' README
# katello-packaging -> foreman-packaging
At the moment Foreman packages are maintained in foreman-packaging[3]
with an RPM branch for every release (rpm/1.15, rpm/1.16, rpm/develop)
and a the same with deb/ for obvious reasons. On the Katello side there
is katello-packaging[4] with KATELLO-3.3, KATELLO-3.4 and master.
There was a discussion in #1541[5] about merging katello-packaging into
foreman-packaging, but it didn't reach a conclusion. The general
opinions were in favour but there might be space and traffic constraints
when actually building the packages.
My proposal is to revive this effort. Given the practical constraints
are related to the hosting it makes sense to me to start with just
merging the git repositories. Is it possible to do the builds from a
single git repository and end up on different servers for now?
If that's possible, we can look at finding proper hosting and which yum
repositories we should offer.
# katello modules -> theforeman namespace (including modulesync)
Right now we have a foreman-installer-modulesync[6] and
katello-installer-modulesync[7] to maintain the base layout of modules.
These are all very similar and with little effort we can maintain all
modules with the same layout.
The bigger impact is that we need to migrate all modules at least on the
github level to the theforeman github namespace. It also implies that
when you make changes to modulesync that needs to be applied to about
double the modules which can be more effort. The upside is that the
overall quality will be higher.
If this all works well we can look at moving the katello modules to the
foreman namespace on the Puppet forge as well but I think that benefit
is smaller and will take effort on the (direct) users since the forge
doesn't support redirects.
# katello-installer -> foreman-installer
Currently the katello-installer[8] builds on the foreman-installer[9]
with additional modules and scenarios. Sometimes the katello build
breaks on dependencies and then the cache gets out of sync with the
foreman thus breaking on older builds as well.
I'd like to merge this in a single installer with one set of modules and
multiple scenarios. The impact is that the installer will be bigger but
the katello-installer should be less fragile. It can also simplify
packaging.
Care will need to be taken that the needed repositories are present but
there are multiple ways of fixing this. Currently we assume the user has
installed the katello release RPM which enables the needed yum
repositories but that will not be true anymore if we ship it within
foreman-installer.
We'll also want to remove/disable the katello scenarios on
Debian/Ubuntu.
You may notice I haven't thought this through too much and it may depend
on a unified Yum repository structure but there are big usability and
reliability wins we can gain.
[1]: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-bats
[2]: https://github.com/theforeman/forklift
[3]: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging
[4]: https://github.com/katello/katello-packaging
[5]: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-packaging/pull/1541
[6]: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-installer-modulesync
[7]: https://github.com/katello/foreman-installer-modulesync
[8]: https://github.com/katello/katello-installer
[9]: https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-installer
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
