Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-09 Thread Ghanshyam Mann
Hi Sean, -Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 10:22 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-09 Thread Ken'ichi Ohmichi
2014-05-09 15:00 GMT+09:00 Ghanshyam Mann ghanshyam.m...@nectechnologies.in: Hi Sean, -Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 10:22 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-09 Thread Sean Dague
: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team is looking pretty positive at no longer branching Tempest. The QA Spec draft for this is here - http://docs-draft.openstack.org/77/86577/2/check/gate-qa-specs- docs

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-09 Thread Matthew Treinish
Mailing List Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team is looking pretty positive at no longer branching Tempest. The QA Spec draft for this is here - http://docs-draft.openstack.org/77/86577/2

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-09 Thread Ken'ichi Ohmichi
] Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 10:22 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team is looking pretty positive at no longer branching Tempest. The QA Spec draft

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-09 Thread Matthew Treinish
-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft When adding new API parameters to the existing APIs, these parameters should be API extensions according to the above guidelines. So we have three options for handling API extensions in Tempest: 1. Consider them

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-03 Thread Kenichi Oomichi
Hi David, -Original Message- From: David Kranz [mailto:dkr...@redhat.com] Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 2:30 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft The verify_tempest_config tool

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-03 Thread Kenichi Oomichi
Hi Matthew, -Original Message- From: Matthew Treinish [mailto:mtrein...@kortar.org] Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 12:36 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft When adding new

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-01 Thread Ken'ichi Ohmichi
Hi Matthew, 2014-04-28 11:54 GMT+09:00 Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com: 2014-04-28 11:02 GMT+09:00 Matthew Treinish mtrein...@kortar.org: On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 01:01:00AM +, Kenichi Oomichi wrote: Now we are working for adding Nova API responses checks to Tempest[1] to block

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-01 Thread Ken'ichi Ohmichi
# Sorry for sending this again, previous mail was unreadable. 2014-04-28 11:54 GMT+09:00 Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com: This is also why there are a bunch of nova v2 extensions that just add properties to an existing API. I think in v3 the proposal was to do this with microversioning

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-01 Thread Matthew Treinish
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 06:18:10PM +0900, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: # Sorry for sending this again, previous mail was unreadable. 2014-04-28 11:54 GMT+09:00 Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com: This is also why there are a bunch of nova v2 extensions that just add properties to an

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-01 Thread David Kranz
On 05/01/2014 11:36 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 06:18:10PM +0900, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: # Sorry for sending this again, previous mail was unreadable. 2014-04-28 11:54 GMT+09:00 Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com: This is also why there are a bunch of nova v2

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-05-01 Thread Sean Dague
On 05/01/2014 01:30 PM, David Kranz wrote: On 05/01/2014 11:36 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 06:18:10PM +0900, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: # Sorry for sending this again, previous mail was unreadable. 2014-04-28 11:54 GMT+09:00 Ken'ichi Ohmichi ken1ohmi...@gmail.com: This

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-28 Thread David Kranz
-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team is looking pretty positive at no longer branching Tempest. The QA Spec draft for this is here - http://docs-draft.openstack.org/77/86577/2/check/gate-qa-specs-docs/3f84796/doc/build/html

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-28 Thread Sean Dague
On 04/28/2014 02:06 PM, David Kranz wrote: On 04/27/2014 10:02 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 01:01:00AM +, Kenichi Oomichi wrote: Hi, Sorry for my late response, but I'd like to discuss this again. Now we are working for adding Nova API responses checks to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-28 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: On 04/28/2014 02:06 PM, David Kranz wrote: On 04/27/2014 10:02 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 01:01:00AM +, Kenichi Oomichi wrote: Hi, Sorry for my late response, but I'd like to discuss this

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-27 Thread Kenichi Oomichi
] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team is looking pretty positive at no longer branching Tempest. The QA Spec draft for this is here - http://docs-draft.openstack.org/77/86577/2/check/gate-qa-specs-docs/3f84796/doc/build/html/specs

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-27 Thread Matthew Treinish
-Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 10:22 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-27 Thread Ken'ichi Ohmichi
Hi Matthew, Thanks for your response. 2014-04-28 11:02 GMT+09:00 Matthew Treinish mtrein...@kortar.org: On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 01:01:00AM +, Kenichi Oomichi wrote: Now we are working for adding Nova API responses checks to Tempest[1] to block backward incompatible changes. With this

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-20 Thread Daisuke Morita
(2014/04/17 4:22), Jaume Devesa wrote: I thought that OpenStack just support one release backwards, if we have to support three versions, this is not useful. In fact, I could not make sense this meaning. OpenStack has two security-supported series and one project under development.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-16 Thread Sean Dague
On 04/16/2014 11:48 AM, Jaume Devesa wrote: Hi Sean, for what I understood, we will need a new feature flag for each new feature, and a feature flag (default to false) for each deprecated one. My concern is: since the goal is make tempest a confident tool to test any installation and not

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-16 Thread David Kranz
On 04/16/2014 11:48 AM, Jaume Devesa wrote: Hi Sean, for what I understood, we will need a new feature flag for each new feature, and a feature flag (default to false) for each deprecated one. My concern is: since the goal is make tempest a confident tool to test any installation and not and

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-16 Thread Jaume Devesa
I thought that OpenStack just support one release backwards, if we have to support three versions, this is not useful. There are already ways to enable/disable modules in tempest to adapt to each deployment needs. Just wanted to avoid more configuration options. On 16 April 2014 21:14, David

[openstack-dev] [all] Branchless Tempest QA Spec - final draft

2014-04-14 Thread Sean Dague
As we're coming up on the stable/icehouse release the QA team is looking pretty positive at no longer branching Tempest. The QA Spec draft for this is here - http://docs-draft.openstack.org/77/86577/2/check/gate-qa-specs-docs/3f84796/doc/build/html/specs/branchless-tempest.html and hopefully