On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 3:43 AM Miguel Lavalle wrote:
> The next step is for each project to propose the jobs that they want to
> run against Neutron patches.
>
This is fantastic. Do you plan to have all patches under a single topic for
easier tracking? I'll be handling the proposal of these
Thomas, Miguel,
Next step is just push a patch for review with the definition of your job.
We can discuss the details in Gerrit
Cheers
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 4:39 AM Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
wrote:
> That's fantastic,
>
>I believe we could add some of the networking ovn jobs, we need to
>
That's fantastic,
I believe we could add some of the networking ovn jobs, we need to
decide which one would be more beneficial.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:02 AM wrote:
> Hi Miguel, all,
>
> The initiative is very welcome and will help make it more efficient to
> develop in stadium projects.
Hi Miguel, all,
The initiative is very welcome and will help make it more efficient to
develop in stadium projects.
legacy-tempest-dsvm-networking-bgpvpn-bagpipe would be a candidate, for
networking-bgpvpn and networking-bagpipe (it covers API and scenario
tests for the BGPVPN API
Hi Takashi,
We are open to your suggestion. What job do you think will be helpful in
minimizing the possibility of Neutron patches breaking your project?
Best regards
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 11:25 PM Takashi Yamamoto
wrote:
> hi,
>
> what kind of jobs should it be? eg. unit tests, tempest,
hi,
what kind of jobs should it be? eg. unit tests, tempest, etc...
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 9:43 AM Miguel Lavalle wrote:
>
> Dear networking Stackers,
>
> During the recent PTG in Denver, we discussed measures to prevent patches
> merged in the Neutron repo breaking Stadium and related
Dear networking Stackers,
During the recent PTG in Denver, we discussed measures to prevent patches
merged in the Neutron repo breaking Stadium and related networking projects
in general. We decided to implement the following:
1) For Stadium projects, we want to add non-voting jobs to the
